Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wayno]

Now I've read the tweets I'm not surprised access was pulled. Whoever was tweeting was clearly tweeting with an anti establishment agenda and intent on using an official communication channel to support the protest and its agenda.

If you'd been on stage the hook would have been coming out to yank you off.

If this was a business (which it is) you'd be looking at a disciplinary. You can't operate in an official or semi official capacity and diss the product.

which tweet do you think was out of order ?

I couldn't see anything out of order ?

Radio robins covered it at 15 minutes stating around 25 walked out and it was then noted it was quiet after

Should they be punished as well ?

[Mausoleum Alty]

It was also mentioned on the match day updates so maybe you want them stopped too Cheshire Cat?

[casper]

Now I've read the tweets I'm not surprised access was pulled. Whoever was tweeting was clearly tweeting with an anti establishment agenda and intent on using an official communication channel to support the protest and its agenda.

If you'd been on stage the hook would have been coming out to yank you off.

If this was a business (which it is) you'd be looking at a disciplinary. You can't operate in an official or semi official capacity and diss the product.

Which tweets are you referring to??

The only ones I have seen are factual. In reference to the protest movement, there was one tweet reporting the inclusion of the protest movement leaving the ground on the website. This was tweeted 5 minutes after the event and inclusion on the matchday update page. As above, it was also covered on Radio Robins.

I do find it extremely hard, actually implausible, to come anywhere near to concluding "Whoever was tweeting was clearly tweeting with an anti establishment agenda".

Many people would like to know why the service was pulled from some clearly avid Altrincham supporters.

Instead of trying to build bridges, this just seems to be further alienating supporters.

We know that our Chairman has read and posted on here in the past. But yet, there is no comment from the club.

[Ballers]

Although I didn't see anything overly untoward in the tweets I think I can understand that having people in the social media team wanting the chairman to resign is a bit problematic for the board.

But that's the sadness of the situation, the people unhappy with the chairman aren't Johnny come latelys or people who just want to moan and blame people (no one is enjoying this), they're actually long standing loyal and passionate supporters so there will be a number who are also volunteers.

As such if you start being heavy handed with them then very soon you'll have avreduced fan base.

Maybe that would be easier for the board but as guardians of the club I think I'd just take the hint to be honest...

[cheshire cat]

Now I've read the tweets I'm not surprised access was pulled. Whoever was tweeting was clearly tweeting with an anti establishment agenda and intent on using an official communication channel to support the protest and its agenda.

If you'd been on stage the hook would have been coming out to yank you off.

If this was a business (which it is) you'd be looking at a disciplinary. You can't operate in an official or semi official capacity and diss the product.

Untrue. The Twitter account provided impartial coverage of events taking place within the ground during the time of the game. There is clearly no agenda within the updates as they are merely factual statements.

If you find there to be an agenda in what you've read, then I suggest you feel the same way about the text updates on the club's official website? They made mention of the events before anything was put on Twitter.

The text dates were informative and stuck to the action on the pitch with a mention of the protest group leaving. The tweets on the other hand did report the facts but mostly with regard to what was going on off the pitch. There were many attempts on the Stalybridge goal during the first half. By half time their end of the ground was churned up which is a good indicator of where the action was but you'd not guess that from the tweets.

What turned out to be the parting shot "Quiet atmosphere, quiet game" I'd disagree with on both counts. People who stayed behind albeit not singing songs but there was a lot of encouragement and clapping by people who probably don't normally. Both teams tried hard to win. Early on we were stimied by a referee who refused to see the holding and shirt tugging but in the second half both teams had plenty of chances and really wanted a result.  

So for me it was a case of damage limitation.

We'll have to wait and see if Bill wants to shed any more light on the situation.

[Alty Bri]

I don't remember many attempts on either goal - particularly in the first half.

[York Alty is back]

I don't remember many attempts on either goal - particularly in the first half.

Nowt wrong with your memory. Remember when we had a footballing team?

[casper]

The text dates were informative and stuck to the action on the pitch with a mention of the protest group leaving. The tweets on the other hand did report the facts but mostly with regard to what was going on off the pitch. There were many attempts on the Stalybridge goal during the first half. By half time their end of the ground was churned up which is a good indicator of where the action was but you'd not guess that from the tweets.

What turned out to be the parting shot "Quiet atmosphere, quiet game" I'd disagree with on both counts. People who stayed behind albeit not singing songs but there was a lot of encouragement and clapping by people who probably don't normally. Both teams tried hard to win. Early on we were stimied by a referee who refused to see the holding and shirt tugging but in the second half both teams had plenty of chances and really wanted a result.  

So for me it was a case of damage limitation.

We'll have to wait and see if Bill wants to shed any more light on the situation.

There were 17 tweets of which 1 was regarding the protest movement "According to our website, a protest movement leaves the ground". A very neutral tweet.
Compared to the matchday update of "15: A number of Alty fans (about two dozen it seems) leave terrace in protest at chairman". Which one in your view is more neutral??

4 out of the 17 were about atmosphere, of which 3 also included updates about the match.

so mostly, 15 out of 17 tweets were about the match.

As there was no damage to limit, it all seems very bizarre.

[taxi Phil]

It's getting like f***ing North Korea. It doesn't particularly matter what was tweeted, provided it was neither personally defamatory, or libellous. Neither seems to be the case.

Quite simply, the "power that be" (all one of him ?) appears to have suppressed dialogue because he wants to save face.

Perhaps he'd like to clarify what happened. If he's in the right and I'm not being fair to him, I'm man enough to apologise and shake his hand. At this moment I'm not holding my breath.

[Teasierbeaver]

So you can report facts, but only the ones that suit, and only if you pledge allegiance.

What a sorry state of affairs this club has become.

I'll make sure I do my best to be involved in any future protest, and hopefully so will many more.

It's now clear the club is being run like a tyrants government. Not run like a football club that's for sure, nor a business and nor a community spirited social experiment.

[York Alty is back]

Rowley Out.

[AFC56]

Twitter back up and running

Not completely true. I was handed the new password late last night and used it to update the account with full time score and a link to the match report which includes the attendance figure (league requirement.)

I'm currently considering my position following yesterday's events and won't be providing any content in the mean time.

You and your mates have done a fine job with the twitter account. Absolutely nothing wrong with the tweets yesterday, yet the treatment received is absolutely disgusting. Rowley out.

[ThatBenCollins]

During the game today, and I followed this almost by the minute, the social media team made reference to the protest 20 minutes into the game stating that the clubs official updates included reference to a protest. There then followed a couple of tweets responding to Ben Collins (journalist) and his blog after direct questions about the protest ('were there not many?' and 'does it mean they won't come back in?'). The tweets were straight forward objective responses, which as I type are still there.

----- Nothing was deleted. We responded once to that Ben Collins, as far as I am aware, unless anyone else went back to him ------

If you were at the game yourself it seemed odd that you tweeted 'According to our website, a protest movement leaves the ground'. That's why I asked if you noticed it.

Didn't expect you to reply so soon so cheers for that. Your replies merely stated the facts so don't know how anyone could suspect an agenda, certainly not from those tweets.

[dingo]

"it was well applauded and supported by a sizeable number" this was tweeted to a journalist.

This is not a true reflection of what happened but is what you tweeted.

Your job is to report what happened not put ur own "sexed up" version.

One person clapped in the main stand while there was an audible chorus of cheerio.

More Stalybridge fans clapped the 24 who walked out than alty fans.

This is just a side show to hide the fact that the protest was a resounding embarrassing failure

[im not really here]

Absolute rubbish, the Popular Side and Golf Road End applauded. Don't distort the facts to suit your own argument. You sound like a member of the Board.