MOLD do the Dirty on Jeff Kent

[Jeff Kent]

Could you please withdraw the comment that I have a weak grasp of facts please. I have a very strong grasp of facts.

When I made that comment, it was my opinion, but the more you post, the more I wonder if you understand what a fact is. You have provided evidence that you don't.

[geosname]

Yes, he has and I've accepted that, but, unfortunately, he then substituted the above remark for it, which is tantamount to the same thing and libellous. So he needs to withdraw it.

 

Im not sure what the "above remark" is....

In an emotionally charged situation people react, there may be no intention to react or cause the reaction but it happens.... this may well be expressed by "it wound me up" or similar.... usually its someones actions or words that cause the reaction.... I suppose it depends on how you define "wound up"... a contrary argument to what you passionately believe can wind people up, however unintentional.... whatever you passionately believe someone will passionately believe the opposite... some are more affected than others just as some are more passionate than others.... I think the common belief is that something that angers us or upsets us could be termed as being wound up/winding us up... the more passionate and contentious the subject the easier it seems to be to get wound up/ wind someone up.

[Santa]

Around 100 people were gathered outside, in what seemed to me to be a mob, and when I walked out, I received a torrent of abuse. Whereabouts were you when you saw me outside?

I would have been somewhere among that mob.

[Jeff Kent]

I'm very sorry to hear that! As you seem a sensible person, I assume you weren't one of those shouting abuse at me.

So are you saying that you were at the meeting and then went out to join those outside before I came out?

[Jeff Kent]

Im not sure what the "above remark" is....

In an emotionally charged situation people react, there may be no intention to react or cause the reaction but it happens.... this may well be expressed by "it wound me up" or similar.... usually its someones actions or words that cause the reaction.... I suppose it depends on how you define "wound up"... a contrary argument to what you passionately believe can wind people up, however unintentional.... whatever you passionately believe someone will passionately believe the opposite... some are more affected than others just as some are more passionate than others.... I think the common belief is that something that angers us or upsets us could be termed as being wound up/winding us up... the more passionate and contentious the subject the easier it seems to be to get wound up/ wind someone up.

The remark is, 'Since when was winding people up the right thing to do?'. This indicates deliberate intention on my part and it's absolutely untrue. Some people clearly got wound up, but I wasn't responsible for any of their responses to points I made peacefully at a supposedly democratic meeting. Alternatively, I could argue that those people who booed me, heckled me and otherwise interrupted my democratic right to speak were winding me up, but I haven't ever seen fit to criticise any of them in public, including on here.

[stupers]

Andyregs has an opinion, and you disagree. It's impossible to prove whether his statement is false or not (I don't have any opinion on whether it is or isn't). Only you know whether you meant to wind people up or not. Regardless of anything else, you only have yourself to back you up on that. That doesn't normally bode well for any legal action. Perhaps you should forget what he said, and move on with your life.

[Jacko51]

I was inside the meeting and heard what Jeff said - he was heckled. It was not in any way a wind up at that stage. I then stood up and gave a different point of view. At no point did Jeff intervene, heckle or argue with me. What happened in the meeting was not a wind up. Jeff was, no doubt, happy that his view of not aboloshing the 24.9% rule had won the day - a considerable number of ordinary shareholders must have agreed with him - hence his response as he came out. I suspect he was also pretty pleased that two Board members were voted off. Seeing how Jeff behaved in the meeting and having some knowledge of what he thought of matters at the time, I would be absolutely astonished if his reaction on coming out of the meeting was an attempt to wind up the fans who were waiting there.

[Jeff Kent]

Andyregs has an opinion, and you disagree. It's impossible to prove whether his statement is false or not (I don't have any opinion on whether it is or isn't). Only you know whether you meant to wind people up or not. Regardless of anything else, you only have yourself to back you up on that. That doesn't normally bode well for any legal action. Perhaps you should forget what he said, and move on with your life.

His statement is false because he doesn't have any evidence to support it. Therefore as he's written it in public, it's libellous. The only known independent and objective record of the meeting, by "The Sentinel", supports my version of events and is very different than his. I've been trying to forget for over five years what people have been writing about me and shouting at me and I'd like to move my life on from this, but I can only do so when others cease to go on about it. If necessary, I will defend myself for the rest of my life.

[bookworm]

why the raking up of old ashes, doesn't help the club in any way shape or form,surely there are more important things to discuss .

[Fosse69]

why the raking up of old ashes, doesn't help the club in any way shape or form,surely there are more important things to discuss .

Please allow Jeff to defend himself, I know it is an old topic, but the thread is dedicated to it.

[old sage]

time to move on Jeff and do what you do best by writing about the club and not arguing with other fans.

For the record I was always against a fan owned club.... why ? Simply because for it to work you need a fan base the size of Man Ure to own a single share. Unfortunately 5-6000 people could never raise enough funds unless the share price is a very large, considerable amount and then the number of supporters who can afford the high cost is greatly reduced and so we are in a catch 22 situation.

 

No sorry its a lovely notion but in the cold light of day one that was and is doomed to failure.

[Santa]

I'm very sorry to hear that! As you seem a sensible person, I assume you weren't one of those shouting abuse at me.

So are you saying that you were at the meeting and then went out to join those outside before I came out?

I went to the AGM and then afterwards I left and spent some time talking to the people who had spent most of the day stood outside hoping (in vain) for a positive outcome.

[Jeff Kent]

why the raking up of old ashes, doesn't help the club in any way shape or form,surely there are more important things to discuss .

Unfortunately, it's all potentially bringing the club into disrepute, but while there are posters who wish to continue to libel me in their public statements, I will continue to defend myself to whatever extent is necessary to put a stop to it. I'd be euphoric to cease to post on this thread, but that ultimately depends on the actions of others.

[Jeff Kent]

time to move on Jeff and do what you do best by writing about the club and not arguing with other fans.

For the record I was always against a fan owned club.... why ? Simply because for it to work you need a fan base the size of Man Ure to own a single share. Unfortunately 5-6000 people could never raise enough funds unless the share price is a very large, considerable amount and then the number of supporters who can afford the high cost is greatly reduced and so we are in a catch 22 situation.

 

No sorry its a lovely notion but in the cold light of day one that was and is doomed to failure.

Thank you for your kind comment about writing about the club being what I do best. I'm currently working on a new Vale history, with very interesting new information on the club's origins, and obviously this never-ending dispute is taking time away from it. But I think you need to appeal to the libellous posters to stop starting arguments with me.

[Jeff Kent]

I went to the AGM and then afterwards I left and spent some time talking to the people who had spent most of the day stood outside hoping (in vain) for a positive outcome.

I respect your comments. For the record, the victory sign I made was inside the meeting and a signal (to those undemocratic people who'd booed, heckled and otherwise interrupted me while I was speaking) that no amount of intimidation would stop me from peacefully putting my point of view.