Cyclops

Hopefully I have attached a file containing the transcripts from the final day of the court hearing. The final day 21 October 2022 was when the the judgment was handed down..It may be of some interest to some people. I found that paragraphs paragraphs 14-17 and 36 until the end the most interesting although there is to me, interest throughout the document. Lawrence v Melbourne Football Club [2022] VSC 658 (2).pdf

A noisy one it seems.

The Seekers might need it.

I believe that Mr Lawrence and Deemocracy asked the club to send the proposed emails a few weeks before the court case. Cost neutral. Having lost the the case the MFC bears most of the costs. I may have to buy another membership just to help out.

Sorry my good fellow. All I can read is excuses for your poor behaviour.

Thanks for your input ITA and you made some very strong points. I too have had problems with cyber security and it is not fun and extremely disturbing. I was behind you until I found you overstating each point you made. In fact I believe you have made your protest all about you. If Mr Lawrence or "this joker" as you call him has "all your data" then I suggest you close your bank accounts. "A lot of members are unhappy" ..how many have you counted?. I couldn' t for the life of me see the want to change "hundred of paragraphs" by Deemocracy. Every person has right to litigate and win. I am also sure it would be unwise to stretch the judgement as awarded. I don't see that Mr Lawrence would be that unwise not to destroy the data. I understand you may be upset but to call Mr Lawrence's supporters Fido and Daffy is just rude and unnecessary. To say Mr Lawrence has been rejected twice with 40% and 27% of votes in the elections is just mathmatically incorrect and I would say that you might also be trying to say that Mr Lawrence is vindictive because of this. A slur on "this bloke" who is unknown to you. I agree with you that "this bloke is actively working" but obviously not in the direction that you approve of. I was gratified to read that you have no ambition to be on the Board. It is a pity that you need to condemn a person who may be interested. As I have said I am sorry that you have been cybersneaked but don't let it define you or your opinion of others.

Thank you Chookrat for your reply and whilst I agree with most of what you say I may see things a little differently. Email addresses may be similar or the same as peoples names but the invitation to exploit that will always be there. I see that Mr Lawrence's nomination for board membership and his obvious want of a strong constitution to be different entities. The only argument I can see is whether the new constitution proposed by the MFC should be carried or not. Legal fees could have been saved on both sides of the debate. Whilst you see Mr Lawrence as a "powerful'" member I see him as a single member asking other "single members" to vote down a proposed change to their clubs constitution using the same rights they have as members.

This further information from MFC regarding the election of directors is a deliberate misconception. The initial period on the board of new the director(s) is by direct placement. When an election is held then the new board member(s) are on the ballot and supported by the board members not up for re-election. Albeit these elections are indeed rare.

I fail to see the key here. Names and postal addresses were given to Deemocracy by MFC as a legal right through a corporate law. Email addresses were given to Deemocracy as a court order. There is no key or link between the two sets of data that I can see. I would think you would need some link field such as member number to combine the data. Deemocracy has plan that has been actioned rather quickly. If it was a game then the score would be : Deemocracy 2 goals MFC yet to score.

As always yourr opinion is appreciated. I must correct myself though. Mr Lawrence achieved 47% and 30% of votes respectively in the last two elections. Your opinion seems to stem greatly from the method that Mr Lawrence is using. It is the method used by the club that I consider needs scrutiny. The club was asked to send emails 3 weeks ago thus avoiding lists of members, snail mail and emails. The club refused. This was mentioned at the hearing

Thank you for your well worded opinion. Just a couple of things if I may. The names addresses of members can be made available to members should a legitimate case be made to the club. Obviously such a case has been made and members are receiving snail mail. Is an email address classed as an address? That is the question before the court. My opinion is that neither the judge, the club or Mr Lawrence want to create a precedent regarding the disclosure of email addresses and the club will send the literature. Democratic elections? A system for choosing and replacing a board through free and fair elections. A system to encourage active participation of members. Hardly fair when candidates cannot contact members but the President writes to members with the purpose of standing behind some candidates. Like the Governor General endorsing a political party. Your small amount of votes gained by Mr Lawrence in the last two elections was indeed 27% in 2021 and I think around 22% in the last one. The number of memberships sold does not equal the number of people who have memberships. Additional females on the board, I believe, secures additional State funding. I also would like to see us take on the best available people.

You have misunderstood me I believe. I did not say it had to be 100% but it needs to be the best we can have to suit the needs and be modern and durable. The impetus behind the changes in the constitution, I believe, was the last two farcical representations of board elections and the rules that govern it. Can we at least get that right?

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.

It is a General Meeting not a Board Meeting. If a 75% yes vote is not reached then we can have a look at both versions...or more

I don't believe it is about the current board but about how they got there To my knowledge all current members were not initially voted onto the board by members but placed on the board until positions were advertised alongside those where the incumbents tenure had lapsed. On most occasions no further action was required.

Yes, why not have a look at it whilst we can! Both versions have been put together by "experts". Alternatively we can do it all again in a few years time.

I would think that Lawrence would have done his homework on the issue of privacy. I also think that we would be facing another postal election this year if not for the urging of supporter groups and Lawrence.

Correct, my pet hate is using "amount" in place of "number". That is, an amount of money reached by having a number of coins. Another is using the collective noun "bunch" for everything.

Weideman is tall and a target but not a marking one. Therein lies his problem.

Perhaps Clarry would have won the Brownlow had it not been for broken thumb courtesy of Selwood. I think he missed a match and was quiet in the next he played

Not only tense but people using "reigns" instead of "reins" and "labor" instead of "labour".

Just reading about the anomaly whereas a member from one club can indicate to tickatek that their membership is with another club and DL members encouraging this practice. Perhaps if we meet Collingwood in a PF we can all nick the Collingwood allocation Imagine the uproar if rival clubs nicked all of the Richmond and Collingwood tickets! Methinks that Collingwood members would tear AFL House down . Although I am sure that Melbourne members would not do such a thing Ticketek should close that loophole before all hell breaks loose.

In Bungaree there is a sign for "???? " Potatoe Farm. How can you farm potatoes and not be able to spell it. Redemption is nearby as there is a farm gate where potatoes are $5 for 5 kilos (kilograms).

Sorry, you find the Dees offensive or you are worried about the Dees offence.

Well said!