Spaghetti

Isn’t this a MCC issue?

Why would the club publicly release this information? 

33 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Outstanding post

Haven't seen the judgement yet pontificating on what it said

Emails were certainly around when the Corporations Act 2001 was drafted.

I don't need to see the judgement. There is no other way a judge could interpret those provisions to say the club is required to hand over an email address. 

2001 is the year of this act. The same or similar provisions appeared in predeccesor state Acts. I guarantee those were drafted well before emails existed. 

Likewise, the existence and use of emails (by some of the population at least) doesn't change the high likelihood that parliament did not intend, at that time, for email addresses to form part of the member register.

1 hour ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Yes it is, and confirmed in yesterdays court case.

No, the court didnt "confirm" that. Without having seen the judgement, they must have interpreted the requirement to hand over a member's "address" as including both their postal address and email address.

When these provisions were first drafted, emails wouldn't have even been a thing. The court is merely interpreting the word and requirement from a modern perspective. 

Sucks for the majority of us that would never want our details handed over to someone like this guy.

12 minutes ago, A F said:

Just delete the email, hero.

You sound like the type of person who would defend government surveillance of their own citizens with “you shouldn’t care if you have nothing to hide”.

You are clueless, champ.

44 minutes ago, chookrat said:

I received the Deemocracy letter in the mail today and I'm trying to work out why Peter Lawrence has sent a letter to every member highlighting that our President and 3 directors are being sued by a former President.  This attempt to discredit our board should be seen for what it is, a move against our board, and the trivial constitution changes make alot more sense when viewed from this perspective.

Does his letter actually say this? I suspect my letter went to a PO Box which I rarely check.

If so, that’s disgraceful. People like him should be kept as far away from the MFC board as possible. We have had decades of ego driven men causing dissent and division on our board. We are as stable and successful as we’ve been for a very long time. People like him should [censored] off.

2 hours ago, Ugottobekidding said:

Your data is given to sponsors 

…with our CONSENT! How is this difficult to understand?

24 minutes ago, Cyclops said:

Correct.  If the current version is not accepted then a new one is drawn up and presented or you present the same one again for acceptance. There is no rush to accept a presentation that is not 100% acceptable.

Disagree with this completely. The club doesn’t have money or time to put constitutional changes to a vote every few months until it’s “100% acceptable”.

If the changes broadly improve things on balance, they should be approved. If people are aiming for perfection, they will get nothing.

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They give all that information to sponsors anyway, why would you be furious if it was given to a member to enable a democratic process to proceed? What are you worried is going to be done with an email address?

I would have thought the difference is obvious.

I consent for my information to be given to sponsors. In fact, I opted out of sponsor emails so I don’t even get those.

2 minutes ago, Graeme Yeats' Mullet said:

So club email advises:

In response to the proposed amendments to the constitution, the Club received a written request from the relevant member to access the Club's members register. The Club is required under the Corporations Act to provide your name and postal address to the member.

An application has now been made to the Supreme Court of Victoria, by the same member, seeking access to additional member information, including email addresses.

The Club is committed to protecting your privacy and is contesting this application. We have engaged legal counsel to appear in court today on behalf of the Club and will do everything we can legally to limit access to the personal information.

 

So Corporations Act require postal address (in many cases no doubt a residential address) but club committed to protecting privacy by not sharing email addresses 🤷‍♂️

Clearly an attempt to prevent timely communications to member base....

I stand 100% with the Board on this issue. I’d be furious if they gave out my email address without asking me. Especially if not required to by law. 

Lots of people here seem so willing to give up their personal information… it’s bizarre.

Clubs changes look good to me. 
 

I’m sure the majority of members won’t let perfect be the enemy of good. Not that I even think these other proposals are necessarily “perfect” mind you.

If this other group want to make further improvements, they can make the case to do so later. 

Honestly, just some forwards (or even just one) that can take a contested mark consistently.

It's laughable that Jack Crisp could be crowned player of the finals having played in two finals losses.

Of course the loading should help a Sydney or Geelong player take the lead, but the leading Swans/Cats are a fair way back as it stands.

These players aren’t just nominating clubs out of the blue. There has been months of discussions behind the scenes.

Quite simply, they don’t nominate us because we aren’t interested in them and/or we don’t have cap space for them.

If we were constantly being reported as being in the hunt for players and missing out… then that would be a different story. But I haven’t seen that reported anywhere.

His two shots from the boundary in the EF were vintage Reiwoldt. He is still better than most of our forward options 

19 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

In all seriousness what would it take to get Grundy over the line?

Depends how desperate Collingwood are to dump salary. They have a few trade targets and have increased their De Goey offer, so that should help.

You are a couple of weeks too late. Pretty sure the club sold a limited number of these a few weeks ago.

Though perhaps you were looking for actual stuff from back then? That may be harder to find anything in decent condition that people are willing to let go.

People commenting on crowd noise need to include a disclaimer if they were not there. Comments like “Sydney crowd seemed louder” just sounds like you were not there and have NFI. 

4 minutes ago, Mr Steve said:

Anyone know what the crowd size was tonight. Sounded like there were more Sydney fans there as will.

~78k 

It was a very Melbourne heavy crowd, but the crowd goes quiet when the team is playing badly and not kicking goals. 
 

Thought the crowd was good tbh.

It is concerning how much work our forward line needs. Fritsch, McDonald (for a couple more years), and Kozi are fine. But beyond that, I’d happily lose the rest that played tonight. 
 

Brown is a massive liability. Especially if he gets anywhere near a loose ball in the middle of the ground.

Max seems to get worse by the week at set shots.

1 minute ago, CYB said:

Curious, Has anyone won a flag after losing the QF? 

Happened in 2020…

Is Buddy out? Someone tells me he’s out with a sore calf. 

Can’t see anything about it.

21 minutes ago, Demons1858 said:

wouldn't be backing Kate to do anything too fast, other than big noting herself upon taking over the presidency. trust me l worked on the tennis centre she told us

She can big note herself all she likes if the board remains stable and club continues to be successful. 

I get the disappointment, but some of the comments here are way over the top.

First, the Board is negotiating with Government. They cannot simply keep us updated on "where things are at" or tell us "what has gone wrong". That's a sure way to get nothing from Government. 

Second, the calls for Roffey or the Board to resign are wild. The club has never been as stable as it is right now. And people here want them to resign?! For what?! So the next people can come in, risk instability, and still not get it done like every board before them? No thanks.

We are all disappointed, but no way would I risk the current state of the club to take a punt on a new board that claims they can "get it sorted". We're in a premiership window, nothing should be done that could jeopardise the chance of more premierships in the coming years (including destabilising the Board).

N54. Happy enough with that. Didn't want to push my luck seeing what else was available.