#1 [url]

Oct 23 07 2:51 PM

Impsforever wrote:
I think thats the same with a lot of people BJM - on both sides of the debate.


I think it's fair to say that anyone who follows the "political" side of the club (as opposed to just turning up to watch the games) has an "agenda" of some kind. I certainly do, and it can be found from reading my posts.

The key for me is how you pursue it, and in particular, how you present it on m/bs. My own view is that open debate furthers the aspirations we have for our club, and that requires that I engage with people that agree and disagree with me.


But I don't understand what people mean by "agenda". I have no agenda, other than I am unhappy and have been for some time with various aspects of the club. Does that mean I am gloating about the problems or uncaring about them, wanting the club to fail? No it bloody doesn't.

The word "agenda" seems to suggest insidiousness and wanting the downfall of something or someone, and people tend to use the phrase to stop an argument. Accusing someone of having an agenda is akin to calling them a Nazi and I've noticed that a lot on LCFC messageboards.