eh? call me blind - but she actually didnt reply to any of your original queries at all!
I'm sorry ph3n0m, ExEircom and neonitrix.
I simply cannot understand the basis of your vitriolic attacks on both CWU and ESOP.
neonitrix sent a letter/email to the GS of the CWU and received a curteous reply.
The letter/email was sent to the ESOP by the CWU, who also replied in detail to the supposed lack of information allegation.
From neonitrix original letter/email, as published
here, it is hard to actually find any substantive queries other than the lack of information allegations.
As I am sure you are aware ESOP is being very creative with the information they are putting out there to their members or lack of information. And telling people they know nothing a day before a glossy brochure is sent to all members doesn’t bode well. I am sure these brochures aren’t printed overnight.
I don’t want to see eircom in jeopardy and fully support the need to keep the company going, but to have the possibility of the ESOP having to invest more into eircom down the line makes me uncomfortable.
I don’t want to see eircom fail but of late the company hasn’t been helping itself and the argument I have seen from some beneficiaries of the esot who are campaigning against the stt transaction is starting to get compelling, considering the lack of info available to esop members of late, and to hear finally from the cwu in the final days of a vote after no contact for so long only confuses me more.
Which queries were not answered by the ESOP or CWU replies?
Is there some further information in the original letter/email which has not been published here, or some other communication which preceded this letter/email?
It is hard to understand the cause of the anger which is obviously being felt by some ESOP participants, generally ex-eircom and ex-CWU.
While I am attempting to understand it, using abusive terminology is no substitute for cogent arguments.
Or more crudely put
'Tell the cu nts nothing'.. Sorry for the profanity but that is how I feel they view us. An annoyance whose existence has to be acknowledged on sufferance every now and again.
No point in being sorry after using profanity instead of argument, unless you intend to edit this out of your post, which I think you should do, out of respect for other users of AAM.
Perhaps you should look at the rules of the Board, particularly , and reconsider how you put your arguments forward.