[Link] No mention of The Happy Fan Group who were/are Daggers owners. Does say KSI has bought a minority stake so maybe they’re still involved. Says he wants to take them to the Premier League. If he’s worth £50m* then he should look up how much it costs to buy a non-scoring striker in a Premier League team right now.

Trump not happy with the UK apparently. Hey ho.

KSI bought daggers?is he any good never heard of him

Trump and Hesgath are Laurel & Hardy and ICM€5

No Sherry or oranges for USA from Spain

Not clear on that OI. It may be a question for that bastion of engagement and information exchange… Discord.

What voting level is required for the constitution? I'm sure it is in the documents somewhere but I'm lazy.

Yeah and that first meeting was pretty good so it’s a shame to see things socked back to us in such apparently dispassionate manner.

There was a meeting and an opportunity to comment on the Draft Constitution and I know many people sent in comments, questions and suggestions. What I really hoped for was a document that showed what came up from members, which suggestions were taken up, which weren't and in the latter case why they were rejected.

Paul Kohler is very supportive of Dons Local Action group and as local MP has taken a greater interest in the football club in recent seasons. As for looking well? No idea, but he did make an extraordinary recovery from the attack.

Essentially Treebs and Doobs are right in that the new constitution should be brought to members in a far more engaging and considered manner with plenty of opportunity for discussion and amendment. It’s already taken far longer than was promised so why rush it through unless there are things in there you don’t want people to see and challenge?

Colin and I are so out of touch with the way things like the constitution are done these days that we're aware that things we find contentious, or worse, may now be par for the course. Interesting to read the observations of you who are still working. (and equally cynical)

Just read the list of Standing Orders that the board are trying to sneak through as part of the new constitution vote. I can foresee plenty of people being manhandled out of trust meetings in future.

Kohler will be back around election time.

Paul Kohler looked quite unwell when asking a question at PMQ a week or two ago.

Unless the ball has bounced back out, I'm not surprised John Martin couldn't stop the goal looking at the relative positions of him and the ball

Spit - any idea how often does Paul Kohler MP pitches up at PL?

As this is wimbledon football related [Link]

*created it not read it

We were promised it in January 2025, so that important votes would be conducted according to a fit-for-purpose process. Ignoring the constitution, the voting process used for selling a huge chunk is a bit pants (can't watch back the SGM then vote, for eg)

Our membership fees have been spent on this new draft - the bloke who’s read it has been paid an unspecified amount to do it. If I were he I’d be protesting about the shoddy execution of it because it would make me look like I lack integrity.

I suspect if you waited for a convenient moment to update the constitution, you'd never get it updated. The year I got voted onto the board we made a start (mainly Hannah Kitchen and Cormac) doing it what I think was "the right way" – engagement and discussions for those who wanted to get involved. But it soon got overtaken by events.

Just spent £35 on a ticket for Northampton, a 12 pm kick off, not sure if that is good value for money.

in short, dont ask people to vote on an important issue before hearing the pros and cons debated on the night. Do allow people to hear the pros and cons debated and then vote (even if they aren't one of the 50 people who can make it to the meeting in person).

I'm a touch upset that we have been asked to vote on an important issue before hearing the SGM debate on it. Again. A members-called SGM pushed for the constitution to be updated *before* any further important votes took place using an out of date, not fit for purpose set of processes. 17 months later, the constitution is being voted upon not only using the old not fit for purpose rules, but at the same time as an important vote on selling a huge chunk of the club. That’s pants. But what’s more specifically shit is that voting is open before people have had a chance to hear the pros and cons debated on the night. That’s totally pants. But to compound that pants into a pants sandwich, if you cannot make it to the SGM at that particular time on that particular day - and don’t want to vote without hearing the pros and cons debated on the night - you are NOT allowed to watch the SGM back and then place your vote. No 24 hours, no one week deadline. Zero. So if you’d like to make an informed vote, but can’t be free at a specific time, you're SOL. Effectively. And that feels, well, pants. The members-called SGM showed this up for the pants process it is. Around 45% voted how the DTB suggested they vote without hearing what they were voting for. Those in the room who had heard what they were voting for voted around 110 for, 3 against. What's that, 98% in favour. That's not a few outliers, that's intentional, informed voting. Even the DTB (to its credit) changed its mind and effectively voted against itself having listened! Being informed makes a HUGE difference. Yet the DTB is effectively pushing for/allowing people to vote uninformed. And on such an important issue, that’s utter utter pants. It has been flagged on Discord and I hope members of the DTB might hurriedly revisit this process or speak freely in protest at it.