What to consider when voting in the CUOSC ballot for board membership

[6EQUJ5]

Perhaps the first pass through the statements of the 8 candidates should be used to discover which of them are the weakest communicators. With the exception of a cheerful 'call to arms' at the end the statements should be written in sentences and paragraphs. They should be written in plain but correct English. They should be correct in terms of vocabulary and grammar. If a candidate has written a statement that does not pass these very basic tests then you should consider that candidate to be weaker than those whose statements do pass these tests. This is because clear, correct English language is important, since any member of the CUOSC board is likely to be interviewed by the representatives of the various media or is likely to have to write or speak on the current issues of his responsibilities.

Your next pass through the statements should examine the rank that each candidate has in his full time job. This indicates expertise, usually meaning that this person has solid experience of being able to govern situations. Any candidate who does not mention his work status probably does not have strong work status and should thus be considered to be weaker than those who do mention it.

[mullen103]

Speaking to people the most important thing, this time is openness and honestly. Without mentioning names, not like 2 candidate who tells you something one minute then something else the next.

As for work, you’ve got a point but the best ever computer programmer I ever worked with was a refuse collector. So not everything is what it seems.

[_Stefan_Kuntz]

This is the first sentence of a recent Unita Fortior statement :-
We're disappointed that CUOSC appear to of misunderstood or mischaracterised our intentions.

That tells me all that I need to know of the leadership of Unita Fortior.
"..... appear to of misunderstood....."

It should be :-
"..... appear to have misunderstood.....".

An organisation that seeks to provide new leadership of CUOSC should not show such ignorance of basic English language.
The person who wrote it is not fit to be a candidate in the ballot for membership of the board of CUOSC and neither are those who approved it for publication.

[mullen103]

I’d much rather have someone who confuses of/have then someone who doesn’t communicate at all.

[griff]

I agree with Mullen. The current CUOSC lot have hidden for too long and need to be gone. And they call themselves a supporters’ club FFS.

[_Stefan_Kuntz]

I say "A plague on both their houses". The sins of the CUOSC board over its entire history are well known. The people who initiated Unita Fortia and who want to get onto the CUOSC board of management are the moderators of thecumbrians.net who have a record of deleting posts that they do not like and who also presided over the deletion of Barry's account and the history of that account. Those moderators clamed that it was a software glitch. Furthermore, it is known that his attempts to get back onto the board were thwarted, presumably by the same software glitch. This indicates the degree of honour that these folk have.

So nobody should preach that either the current CUOSC board members or those Unita Fortior people who wish to replace them are substantially honourable. Both parties are equally lacking in this respect. What is at issue is power, defined by a 25.37% of the Holdings shares. But this in the end will be pointless. The club will either become insolvent, thus ceasing to exist, or a new ownership will occur which will own all the Holdings shares. Then the pompous interest in being on the CUOSC board will cease.

For the moment let's tell the truth. The current CUOSC board cannot communicate and the challengers from thecumbrians.net / Unita Fortior are obviously flawed characters who also have no command of the English language, faults which are clearly fundamental problems that should disqualify them.

Be careful what you wish for.

[_Stefan_Kuntz]

Correction of error :-
Those moderators claimed that it was a software glitch.