Whatever happened to A.J.D.

Anna was voted onto the ec or “board”

hypothetically it could happen 

sorry, just mischief making 

So, Committee, what is the ongoing plan of mediation, for instance, with AJD? 

     You seem to  have taken a decision for a ban, temporary or otherwise,( I am not clear). However, that on it’s own, is not enough.

    I take the view that almost anything can be resolved through communication ( but not ANY communication), so this is not over yet.

Just put all Anna's posts into pre moderation, ie they do not get added until reviewed. Then no way any of her posts can be made public and be deformation.

As for Truth checking Facebook have submitted to a court an admission that their 'Fact Check decisions' are opinion and not actual facts. 

Much as I enjoyed AJD 's info, I support our Committee's position as described by Peter.  It is not possible or reasonable for every one of us to have our own way in everything, and we should not allow this argument to wander on and divide the club.  The issue of restricting freedom to express one's own opinions is not the point. I hope I, like all members, am free to have my own opinions on any topic, but the NOC is under no obligation to publish them - especially if they might endanger the  NOC.

I'm pretty sure that this thread all started off because of Anna. Since it started I have been accused of chastising and threatening people over Mr S Garner when I was on the EC. I can't remember doing that Gino. My only wish was that he would revive the Norton name, something that early on I'm sure we all were hoping for. It is always interesting to watch what effect 'controversial' personalities have on an organisation and we have had a few through the years. What organisation hasn't?

Perhaps those of you who would like to see Anna back on the website would like to volunteer to run the website. If we are all going to stand back and make suggestions in favour of Anna, perhaps we could make her Chairman at the next AGM and then, for a year, have a good time slagging off the people who voted her into that position. I don't profess to have an answer to this particular problem. Someone dear to me and not a member of the Club at the time used to wonder why we allowed Anna to post some of her views on the Club's site. I admit that at the time I had to agree. Can anyone be sure that anything will have changed if we allow her back on, or will we just go around in the same old crazy circle?

Whatever we decide. Happy Christmas Anna. And the same to the rest of you.

Much as Jan N's suggestion of 'moderation' (& others) appears to be a solution, it isn't really. The current Moderator already does a pretty good job of filtering out the undesirable postings. It was mostly Anna's postings on other WebSites that led to conflict with the NOC hierarchy and her current situation. Of which the majority of us mere members know nothing.

That brings into question something that has bothered me for a long time. Anna was arrested, tried and sentenced, apparently on behalf of the membership who, mostly, were blissfully unaware anything had happened upart from Anna disappearing from the NOC Forums.

Like the dealings with Andover Norton, nothing was released/revealed via the Director's Meetings Minutes. Why???  If the Directors are holding meetings to make decisions and take action on, allegedly, the member's behalf then why are we not kept informed of all the decisions?

Following on from each Director's Meeting, the Minutes of the previous Meeting are recorded as accurate and approved as such. But are they? How can we tell?

anna should be allowed back she is norton  through and through every body  is entitled to a opinion  lets have a vote on it .