Change to allow campaigning in elections to change 7% turnout - Board says may favour popular people

[Ooh aah Paskin]

Its not rocket science surely to build a mailing list from the club/trust email address for all those members that have provided addresses?

[Lods]

The board comment on social media numbers is something to consider though.

Candidate A with a couple of thousand followers on Twitter and 200 Facebook friends is going to have a more successful campaign than Candidate B with a hundred followers on Twitter and 50 Facebook friends regardless of policy.

As someone who has seen plenty of online campaigns inside and out of football, the board's comment rings true with me. Social media "influencers" exist for a reason - although we're probably talking a higher scale than this election.

Not that I disagree with the motion personally (I think getting more people involved in this process is a good thing), I'm just playing devil's advocate with the board's comment which I think is a fair one.

[Rob]

Originally Posted by Lods

The board comment on social media numbers is something to consider though.

Candidate A with a couple of thousand followers on Twitter and 200 Facebook friends is going to have a more successful campaign than Candidate B with a hundred followers on Twitter and 50 Facebook friends regardless of policy.

As someone who has seen plenty of online campaigns inside and out of football, the board's comment rings true with me. Social media "influencers" exist for a reason - although we're probably talking a higher scale than this election.

Not that I disagree with the motion personally (I think getting more people involved in this process is a good thing), I'm just playing devil's advocate with the board's comment which I think is a fair one.

If A's mates are not members or are non voting members B's could win if their smaller groups is more engaged.

People who use facebook should start on minus votes anyway

[Lods]

Originally Posted by Rob

If A's mates are not members or are non voting members B's could win if their smaller groups is more engaged.

People who use facebook should start on minus votes anyway

That's true. As I said, I think weighing the pros and cons of the motion I'm in favour of it, but social media influence is something to consider.

And agreed with Facebook. Stopping using that was the best decision of my life.

[Hightown Brymbo Red]

387 people voted on the no confidence vote on the board on here in January. Whether you agree with the vote or not the trust can only dream of those sort of numbers to vote at the agm. Couldnt the trust utilise RP as a vehicle to access fans and trust members to vote on trust issues?

[Huffy]

Originally Posted by Iesty

voted for probably the first time in my membership because i saw these threads

I have too

[Birdy]

Originally Posted by WrexhamO

I don't get any emails from the club/WST either.

It's a recurring problem that Rich Ulrich rectified on more than 1 occasion for me, the last being shortly before he resigned. It does not seem to have lasted very long.

Seems we have a problem there..

You are not missing out on much its just an email which links to the website:

"WST AGM 2019 Resolutions - Online Voting Opens

There are EIGHT (8) resolutions for members to vote on at this years WST AGM to be held at 7.30pm on Thursday 27th June 2019 at the Centenary Club, The Racecourse Ground, Wrexham LL11 2AH.

Members can now vote online For or Against the resolutions HERE

Members who have yet to vote in the WST Board Elections can do so online HERE

All eligible members are encouraged to cast their votes."

[Birdy]

Originally Posted by Lods

The board comment on social media numbers is something to consider though.

Candidate A with a couple of thousand followers on Twitter and 200 Facebook friends is going to have a more successful campaign than Candidate B with a hundred followers on Twitter and 50 Facebook friends regardless of policy.

As someone who has seen plenty of online campaigns inside and out of football, the board's comment rings true with me. Social media "influencers" exist for a reason - although we're probably talking a higher scale than this election.

Not that I disagree with the motion personally (I think getting more people involved in this process is a good thing), I'm just playing devil's advocate with the board's comment which I think is a fair one.

Russians in WST vote rigging shocker

[Bigmike]

Originally Posted by Lods

The board comment on social media numbers is something to consider though.

Candidate A with a couple of thousand followers on Twitter and 200 Facebook friends is going to have a more successful campaign than Candidate B with a hundred followers on Twitter and 50 Facebook friends regardless of policy.

As someone who has seen plenty of online campaigns inside and out of football, the board's comment rings true with me. Social media "influencers" exist for a reason - although we're probably talking a higher scale than this election.

Not that I disagree with the motion personally (I think getting more people involved in this process is a good thing), I'm just playing devil's advocate with the board's comment which I think is a fair one.

Good point