Respect...

But, and it is a big but, the person who was banned was not one of the Off-Topic posters ! They are very much still at large, still posting off-topic stuff.

GREEN EYES...sorry i will respect this general view,curb the crap and talk the FACs.O/T will be marked and i will limit posting to allow you to get in. ROCKET REGRET MICK :)

Well, if you look at the statistics, you'll see that Fred West aka Tim J has been reinstated.

The others (Muffy, Liv...) weren't banished, Fred was the only one.

I do not wish to comment on this subject but we have to be accurate : all their accounts are now active, even Fred's.

Now, will they still want to post here, is another matter and I can't answer for them.

I just spoke to Tim, he hasn't been reinstated. He is the scapegoat for all this hassle it seems.

Originally posted by Jen I just spoke to Tim, he hasn't been reinstated. He is the scapegoat for all this hassle it seems.

That's weird... If you look at the stats, his account looks activated (when a member is banned, usually, his name disappears from the statistics).

And Nic wrote, a few hours ago, that Fred's problem was on the verge of being solved.

Has Fred tried to post now ?

Yes he has tried, but it comes up with "your posting priveledge (sic) has been removed by a moderator".

Originally posted by Oh, I've got green eyes > Originally posted by El Jarveaux I'm still confused as to who 'all these people' were that Muffy, Liv, Tim, etc, scared off?

Guess what? Since Seb (maybe over-)reacted to this situation, the forum is back to normal and I'm happy to be here again because the useful information is no longer flooded in irrelevant stuff. I can react to the topics that interest me in 10 minutes without having to spend hours trying to excavate them from the muddy rest.

I am NOT saying that banishing people was a good idea. Sincerely, I found the concerned people sympathetic. The problem was that, whether sympathetic or not, they tended to behave too much as if they were in a private chat room. Unfortunately, more and more people on this forum felt that they didn't have much to share with them, and left.

I sincerely hope that these people will be reintegrated, but also that everybody will from now on respect the subjects of the threads and no longer make them their own chat rooms. If every out-of-topic thread was marked as such, it would also make everybody's life on this forum much easier.

Just my opinion and that of many people from the french forum. Nothing personal against anybody here, just a general statement.

They weren't banned for posting off-topic posts. They were banned for objecting to unwarranted personal attacks on people who had done nothing to deserve it.

Originally posted by Jen Yes he has tried, but it comes up with "your posting priveledge (sic) has been removed by a moderator".

Well, sorry then, I really thought that part of the problem was arranged.

Agreed Jarvo.

This off topic stuff is a complete red herring.

The reason everything has gone 'Pete Tong' is because of that old favourite - a clash of personalities between some forum members.

I would also like to say that surely it is up to the moderators 'to moderate' the off topic postings. If the moderators / other users feel that certain individuals are posting too many OT threads then I'm sure a gentle and adult reminder to that individual will sort out any misunderstandings. After all, is that not the role of a moderator?

If people, after being reminded in a nice way, don't take the hint, then fair enough ban their asses.

I can't help thinking a lot of this stuff should of been nipped in the bud earlier if people really felt that strongly about OT postings.

It's not rocket science - a bit of common sense is required.

Just a quick note : although it's written "Moderator" under my name, I only moderate the French forum and, as such, I don't have any "power" in here...

Just a quick note : although it's written "Moderator" under my name, I only moderate the French forum and, as such, I don't have any "power" in here...

Isn't it more a case of a clash of personalities between one of the webmasters and several of the forum members ?

Originally posted by Mickey Way Agreed Jarvo.This off topic stuff is a complete red herring.The reason everything has gone 'Pete Tong' is because of that old favourite - a clash of personalities between some forum members.I would also like to say that surely it is up to the moderators 'to moderate' the off topic postings. If the moderators / other users feel that certain individuals are posting too many OT threads then I'm sure a gentle and adult reminder to that individual will sort out any misunderstandings. After all, is that not the role of a moderator?If people, after being reminded in a nice way, don't take the hint, then fair enough ban their asses.I can't help thinking a lot of this stuff should of been nipped in the bud earlier if people really felt that strongly about OT postings.It's not rocket science - a bit of common sense is required.

It's definitely bollocks surely Shug is the biggest offender and Scottish, yet he hasn't been singled out despite holding his hand up and admitting it, he remains one of the most popular posters. Obviously I wouldn't have singled him out if I didn't agree with his popularity, not sure about the Scottishness though.

Maybe a general chat forum is a good idea but I think some of the cross fertilisation that occurs is a good thing and that was one of the reasons that splitting the forum led to slightly ostracising the non-English speakers.

Who is so precious anyway that they are arsed if a topic swerves off the rails?

Exactement! (forgive my spelling)

Originally posted by El Jarveaux In fairness, the people who've disappeared DID, as far as I was aware, post ON-topic, in the main. So, Ben, it's disappointing to hear someone who's amassed nigh on 400 post saying that he's happy to be back now that certain people have gone.

I'm not saying that I'm happy to be back now that they are gone (look closer to my message, and you will see that it says that I'd like to see everybody back). But: I'm happy that the forum has come back to a more balanced state, which allows me to come back. Now, to be fair, I must add that I don't think that this balanced state is due to the departure of a few people, but rather to the shock it has created: everybody seems to behave more reasonably now (maybe are they afraid of being banished as weel?).

So, I'm obviously now wondering what insights you can bring to NewOrderOnline that can amply replace the thoughts of Sloppy, Grahame, Liv and the Muffster.. .?

Nothing allows me to think that my presence is more valuable than theirs of than anybody's, at least when they don't spoil the forum with O/T and private stuff.

Again, I want to make my thoughts clear: I am not accusing Liv, Muffy et al. of being responsible of the drifting of the forum (sorry if I gave this impression). As I stated in my first message, I don't know the name of the people who were doing the mess in the forum. I am just observing that their banishment has brought balance to the Force, hu, to the forum, I mean. It's a classroom effect: the punishment of one pupil (even the wrong one) affects all the others.

I don't know if the banished people you mentioned diserved it: i had already left this forum when it happened. I don't even want to know it. I hope they'll be back soon, and I hope that everybody (i.e. not only them) will behave better in the future. I think it's quite reasonable a wish.

Originally posted by Mickey Way Exactement! (forgive my spelling)

Your spelling is alright! Hope to see you on the french forum ;)

Without wishing to sound like Billy Graham, a church isn't the building, it's the people within the building.....

I have to say the whole thing's a rather boring distraction to what was, I thought, quite an interesting proposition.

I've read the T's & C's and attempt to adhere to the requests and requirements of the 'people of power'.

Perhaps there are actually two issues requiring resolution - that of the debate to date (and any future as it appears that resolution is perhaps some way off) and that of the nature of public access forums.

If one invites the public in, the public by default have influence over the site.

If the banned (or not banned, or whatever their status is) people want to come back, but can't, I guess their solution is to sort something else out, as has been initiated.

If they are allowed back, I guess the question they should be asking themselves is do they want to come back.

If the people running this site have clear intentions in terms of promotion of growth of the site and a vision for development, perhaps it would be worth the (non-confidential) aspects of their plan to be made open to the public for inspection and then those who feel like hanging around can do so. Should the circumstances be such that there's a groundswell of public opinion against said plans, then I guess it's time to ship out.

Life's too short, really.....

I'd love to add to the Howard Jones deviation, but face it folks, it's just not netiquette, eh?!

[Content deleted by Spotnick on 6/20/2002 6:17:34 PM EDT]

Originally posted by Hank Wiseass©
> Originally posted by Mickey Way> Agreed Jarvo.> > This off topic stuff is a complete red herring.> > I would also like to say that surely it is up to the moderators 'to moderate' the off topic postings. If the moderators / other users feel that certain individuals are posting too many OT threads then I'm sure a gentle and adult reminder to that individual will sort out any misunderstandings. After all, is that not the role of a moderator?> > If people, after being reminded in a nice way, don't take the hint, then fair enough ban their asses.> I can't help thinking a lot of this stuff should of been nipped in the bud earlier if people really felt that strongly about OT postings.> It's not rocket science - a bit of common sense is required.

It's definitely bollocks surely Shug is the biggest offender and Scottish, yet he hasn't been singled out despite holding his hand up and admitting it, he remains one of the most popular posters. Obviously I wouldn't have singled him out if I didn't agree with his popularity, not sure about the Scottishness though.

Please don't mind me, but I just wanted to put my point of view across and draw attention to the fact that - with regard to the issue of needless off-topic postings - we have had here on this forum, a recent addition to the ranks (Mick ) who has managed to clock up several hundred posts in his relatively brief time here (less than a month from my calculation)....this wouldn't be such a staggering achievement when you consider how - no matter how knowledgable, and entertaining, he seems (and he does genuinely know a lot about all things related to New Order) - of most of these 900-odd posts, about 20 percent of them made sense and the other 80 percent would have actually struggled to comprise one paragraph in itself!! In many cases, several successive posts were made inside of a few minutes, some repeated, some not, but always comprised of just one or two words......are you telling me that this sort of thing should be encouraged?

Without meaning to blatantly point the finger (and I certainly don't - just merely explaining the way I see it) is this not the work of someone who thrives on simply posting as much pointless inanities as possible in an attempt to clock up the most posts in the shortest time, thereby in effect abusing his posting privileges? Cos that's the way I see it. And yet he doesn't appear to have been taken to task for this.....whilst other casual off-topic posters may have been..... I'm frankly confused.....

Off-topic rambling is fine in context of course - no-one ever said it was illegal did they? - but this is something else entirely - you just don't spam the board (or interrupt the flow of a thread) repeatedly with multiple postings which just read like so much (drunken) gibberish.... It quickly gets incredibly tiresome and tedious to have to wade through all the shite just to get to something more interesting and thought-provoking. I hope I haven't trodden on any toes by saying this...but I felt I had to say something likewise.

[Content deleted by Spotnick on 6/20/2002 6:17:02 PM EDT]

Originally posted by Jonathan S. From you I expect little but how about you explain your allegations against me about the sites mp3 files and my supposed involvement with the bands management and record company in relation to their removal?That would be a start.

Someone who has been the object of such abuse surely is entitled to ask for an explanation of the charges that have been made against him.

HUBERT i know i have been OTT BUT i do not intend to upset YOU or anyone else...my toes are sore enough.You are correct in some assumptions but not in others.Anyhow i WILL behave or leave.I think i just got a bit upset with all the trouble and tried to lighten the tone.Sorry i caused offence and will make amends by telling you some VALID and great tales(i hope) of collecting,the ORDER and spinoffs and contribute more to the relevant points.IT IS ALL MY FAULT. RM

[Content deleted by Spotnick on 6/20/2002 6:20:09 PM EDT]

[Content deleted by Spotnick on 6/20/2002 6:21:03 PM EDT]

[Content deleted by Spotnick on 6/20/2002 6:21:25 PM EDT]