My comments earlier were not directed at individuals who voted as they saw it at the EGM (you should always follow your conscience). Well done to GOF who took the result philosophically in accepting the democratic vote.

My flabber was so gasted at the argument of "it not being in the interest of the trust" to vote DB out.

As I saw it the vote was for:

1. Is DB sympathetic and actively supporting the trust's objectives?

2. If not should he be a member of the trust?

Then a third option was introduced ie although we agree that he should not be a member of the trust would it be in our interest to vote him off?

Most seemed to agree he should not be on the trust and some stated even though they agreed with this they voted for him to stay because of possible repercussions. Obviously swayed by the thought of adverse comments that may come the trust's way. Is the trust that weak they cannot stand criticism of voting what is right?

Was the other view put, about the adverse publicity coming from failing to carry the motion? Or that fans are boycotting games because of Brown, will they boycott the trust for the same reason? Did it occur to anyone to consider the implications to the major protest in that a failure to carry the motion would result in the comment that the trust is not behind the removal of Brown from EFFC. Especially as it can be pointed out he is more in in conflict with the trust than he is with the club.

In short I can see more problems from not supporting the motion.

Again I reiterate that this is not having a go at individuals or the trust. We need the trust to lead the way to a better club with the interests of all parties at heart.

It is really a comment on the delicate performance of democracy.

Nuff said. Now lets get on with the real fight!

See you on the mound tomorrow.

Democracy is a flawed thing, I believe in majority rule, although I don't think the vote lastnight was important in the bigger picture i'd prefer to see majorities win votes rather than all this stuff about percentages. Although i'm not clued up at all on the ins and outs of the trust rules so perhaps someone could clarify.

See you all on the mound tomorow.

Lets put this vote behind us now and unite behind the movement to get rid of the most serious problem East Fife have faced in years, Derrick Brown.

It has been said before but I'll say it again Brown would lose the balance of power if The Rodgers and Rankine/Twigg pulled the plug.

It's maybe time to pull resources with Dumbarton sympathisers to get The SFA to look seriously at the dual ownership issue which is still there.

Brown has the skin of a rhino whereas Rankine/Twigg and The Rodgers may not like it when the focus is now put on them.

Down with Brown.

Pressure on Rankine/Twigg and Rodgers family.

Well said, everyone on this thread. United we stand, divided we fall.
Brown is cowering in a corner while we have maintained our dignity and integrity throughout. The struggle goes on and we will win. See you on the mound tomorrow...

I can disagree with the comment of "broon cowering in the corner" to more like he will be "laughing down his sleeve". He will see it as a gain to him. So, the protest has to gain momentum for the point of getting "broon oot", and the meeting on the mound today is the beginning of the next part of the protest. I am not a trust member and at present do not trust the idea of the trust. This is my opinion and will remain so until I CHANGE MY THOUGHTS.
Good luck to you all on achieving your aim of removing broon.