How hard is it to get kicked out of NOD?

[Straw-Man]

Must have had my transport beams crossed. My apologies.

 

accepted, grudgingly, but please get it right next time.

[esquirecomics]

Just read this on the NOD web-site...

 

was expelled for failure to cooperate in an investigation of perceived rule violations regarding disclosure, and repeated failure to properly display NOD logo.

 

Now I am not sure what the investigation was about, but I can certainly understand

the logo logic. It is very hard to get members to adhere to this strict rule.

The NOD logo must be displayed proudly so that everyone can see that it is a vital organization. Kinda like a policeman carrying a badge.

 

And there must be a surplus of members in the NOD organization.

All of them had better display that logo from here on out.

Otherwise the NOD officers might cast out another valued collector just to make a point.

 

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy

 

 

then why did you mention his name at all? Ricky's post went out of it's way to make the member anonymous.

 

Good question Billy. I appreciate the opportunity to have to respond to something you write as part of the coordinated effort.

 

Let's see, why did I mention Steve's name (without mentioning any details of course)?

 

Hmmm, I'm still thinking.

 

Oh yes, now I remember: Notice of Member Expulsion

 

There is no value in an NOD-type organization that promotes disclosure to then hide any negatives that come to light during the course of its operations. Indeed, we will do the opposite and have amply demonstrated that fact in the two cases (Naiman and Meyer) that have come to light during the last 15 months. The NOD is a completely above-board organization that will not hesitate to discipline its own when the situation warrants. Of course, the potential for discipline is agreed to willingly and voluntarily by every member who pays their dues.

[GACollectibles]

Just read this on the NOD web-site...

 

was expelled for failure to cooperate in an investigation of perceived rule violations regarding disclosure, and repeated failure to properly display NOD logo.

 

Now I am not sure what the investigation was about, but I can certainly understand

the logo logic. It is very hard to get members to adhere to this strict rule.

The NOD logo must be displayed proudly so that everyone can see that it is a vital organization. Kinda like a policeman carrying a badge.

 

And there must be a surplus of members in the NOD organization.

All of them had better display that logo from here on out.

Otherwise the NOD officers might cast out another valued collector just to make a point.

 

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy

 

 

then why did you mention his name at all? Ricky's post went out of it's way to make the member anonymous.

 

Good question Billy. I appreciate the opportunity to have to respond to something you write as part of the coordinated effort.

 

Let's see, why did I mention Steve's name (without mentioning any details of course)?

 

Hmmm, I'm still thinking.

 

Oh yes, now I remember: Notice of Member Expulsion

 

There is no value in an NOD-type organization that promotes disclosure to then hide any negatives that come to light during the course of its operations. Indeed, we will do the opposite and have amply demonstrated that fact in the two cases (Naiman and Meyer) that have come to light during the last 15 months. The NOD is a completely above-board organization that will not hesitate to discipline its own when the situation warrants. Of course, the potential for discipline is agreed to willingly and voluntarily by every member who pays their dues.

 

Then again I say this....

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy and are not looking to reveal the details of what transpired.

 

Er, wouldn't this counterproductive to the "disclosure" part of the NOD organization?

[esquirecomics]

If he longer wishes to be a member of NOD, then that of course is his decision. However, to come here and speculate that, "My personal opinion is that we, in the comic collecting community, will discover other stuff that this person has done and will continue to do," just doesn't seem kosher to me.

 

Nothing personal, of course, but before you call someone's character into question, publicly, it would be nice to have substantial proof.

 

And yes, I am aware of the instance that precipitated these events.

 

I have to agree with this. To assume that anyone not wanting to be affilliated with NOD is up to unscrupulous behaviour is just ridiculous. I guarantee you there are people within NOD who are breaking the rules, and I guarantee there are people who are not in NOD who are honest.

 

 

Dale, I'm not quite sure what you are talking about when you write "[t]o assume that anyone not wanting to be affilliated with NOD is up to unscrupulous behaviour is just ridiculous." The NOD is a voluntarily organization with a membership that chooses to join of their own accord. There is no penalty, presumed or ascribed, by the NOD to anyone who chooses not to join, for whatever reasons they might have.

 

If you believe there are members within the NOD that are violating our rules, then please do provide us with that information, and we will act on it. Merely painting a broad brush based on nothing but your own conjecture accomplishes very little in making your point, although I do agree with you that there are honest people who are not members of the NOD.

[esquirecomics]

Just read this on the NOD web-site...

 

was expelled for failure to cooperate in an investigation of perceived rule violations regarding disclosure, and repeated failure to properly display NOD logo.

 

Now I am not sure what the investigation was about, but I can certainly understand

the logo logic. It is very hard to get members to adhere to this strict rule.

The NOD logo must be displayed proudly so that everyone can see that it is a vital organization. Kinda like a policeman carrying a badge.

 

And there must be a surplus of members in the NOD organization.

All of them had better display that logo from here on out.

Otherwise the NOD officers might cast out another valued collector just to make a point.

 

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy

 

 

then why did you mention his name at all? Ricky's post went out of it's way to make the member anonymous.

 

Good question Billy. I appreciate the opportunity to have to respond to something you write as part of the coordinated effort.

 

Let's see, why did I mention Steve's name (without mentioning any details of course)?

 

Hmmm, I'm still thinking.

 

Oh yes, now I remember: Notice of Member Expulsion

 

There is no value in an NOD-type organization that promotes disclosure to then hide any negatives that come to light during the course of its operations. Indeed, we will do the opposite and have amply demonstrated that fact in the two cases (Naiman and Meyer) that have come to light during the last 15 months. The NOD is a completely above-board organization that will not hesitate to discipline its own when the situation warrants. Of course, the potential for discipline is agreed to willingly and voluntarily by every member who pays their dues.

 

Then again I say this....

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy and are not looking to reveal the details of what transpired.

 

Er, wouldn't this counterproductive to the "disclosure" part of the NOD organization?

 

Not at all, there are such things as legitimate privacy concerns. We publicly provided the name of the member that was disciplined and the specific reason for the discipline. No one needs any more details than that, and if they do - as I have said before - they can go ask Steve directly.

[blazingbob]

Oh Nick.

 

Simple question which I'm sure Brent asked.

 

Is the following book pressed?

 

Response, Yes/No/I don't know.

 

 

[blazingbob]

No, the Marc Schreuder did it does trump that though

[MrBedrock]

Of course, the potential for discipline is agreed to willingly and voluntarily by every member who pays their dues.

 

"Thank you, Sir. May I have another?"

[MrBedrock]

No, the Marc Schreuder did it does trump that though

[GACollectibles]

Just read this on the NOD web-site...

 

was expelled for failure to cooperate in an investigation of perceived rule violations regarding disclosure, and repeated failure to properly display NOD logo.

 

Now I am not sure what the investigation was about, but I can certainly understand

the logo logic. It is very hard to get members to adhere to this strict rule.

The NOD logo must be displayed proudly so that everyone can see that it is a vital organization. Kinda like a policeman carrying a badge.

 

And there must be a surplus of members in the NOD organization.

All of them had better display that logo from here on out.

Otherwise the NOD officers might cast out another valued collector just to make a point.

 

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy

 

 

then why did you mention his name at all? Ricky's post went out of it's way to make the member anonymous.

 

Good question Billy. I appreciate the opportunity to have to respond to something you write as part of the coordinated effort.

 

Let's see, why did I mention Steve's name (without mentioning any details of course)?

 

Hmmm, I'm still thinking.

 

Oh yes, now I remember: Notice of Member Expulsion

 

There is no value in an NOD-type organization that promotes disclosure to then hide any negatives that come to light during the course of its operations. Indeed, we will do the opposite and have amply demonstrated that fact in the two cases (Naiman and Meyer) that have come to light during the last 15 months. The NOD is a completely above-board organization that will not hesitate to discipline its own when the situation warrants. Of course, the potential for discipline is agreed to willingly and voluntarily by every member who pays their dues.

 

Then again I say this....

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy and are not looking to reveal the details of what transpired.

 

Er, wouldn't this counterproductive to the "disclosure" part of the NOD organization?

 

Not at all, there are such things as legitimate privacy concerns. We publicly provided the name of the member that was disciplined and the specific reason for the discipline. No one needs any more details than that, and if they do - as I have said before - they can go ask Steve directly.

 

Privacy concerns or not, these statements have some contradiction.

 

"There is no value in an NOD-type organization that promotes disclosure to then hide any negatives that come to light during the course of its operations."

 

"Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy and are not looking to reveal the details of what transpired".

 

If Steve was booted due to "negatives", aren't you in fact hiding them(the details that is, other than the non-display of the logo)?

 

 

[Red Hook]

No, the Marc Schreuder did it does trump that though

 

Ancient history. Think....Ewert.

[MrBedrock]

No, the Marc Schreuder did it does trump that though

 

Ancient history. Think....Ewert.

(thumbs u

[mica]

Every time I see the NOD logo I wonder if it wouldn't be more appropriate for a group of joy buzzer enthusiasts.

 

That was not fair! Now every time I see that logo, I am going to think about joy buzzers.

 

I was traumatized at a very young age with a joy buzzer and curl up like a new boen when ever they are mentioned or near me.

real knee slapper

[esquirecomics]

Just read this on the NOD web-site...

 

was expelled for failure to cooperate in an investigation of perceived rule violations regarding disclosure, and repeated failure to properly display NOD logo.

 

Now I am not sure what the investigation was about, but I can certainly understand

the logo logic. It is very hard to get members to adhere to this strict rule.

The NOD logo must be displayed proudly so that everyone can see that it is a vital organization. Kinda like a policeman carrying a badge.

 

And there must be a surplus of members in the NOD organization.

All of them had better display that logo from here on out.

Otherwise the NOD officers might cast out another valued collector just to make a point.

 

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy

 

 

then why did you mention his name at all? Ricky's post went out of it's way to make the member anonymous.

 

Good question Billy. I appreciate the opportunity to have to respond to something you write as part of the coordinated effort.

 

Let's see, why did I mention Steve's name (without mentioning any details of course)?

 

Hmmm, I'm still thinking.

 

Oh yes, now I remember: Notice of Member Expulsion

 

There is no value in an NOD-type organization that promotes disclosure to then hide any negatives that come to light during the course of its operations. Indeed, we will do the opposite and have amply demonstrated that fact in the two cases (Naiman and Meyer) that have come to light during the last 15 months. The NOD is a completely above-board organization that will not hesitate to discipline its own when the situation warrants. Of course, the potential for discipline is agreed to willingly and voluntarily by every member who pays their dues.

 

Then again I say this....

 

Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy and are not looking to reveal the details of what transpired.

 

Er, wouldn't this counterproductive to the "disclosure" part of the NOD organization?

 

Not at all, there are such things as legitimate privacy concerns. We publicly provided the name of the member that was disciplined and the specific reason for the discipline. No one needs any more details than that, and if they do - as I have said before - they can go ask Steve directly.

 

Privacy concerns or not, these statements have some contradiction.

 

"There is no value in an NOD-type organization that promotes disclosure to then hide any negatives that come to light during the course of its operations."

 

"Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy and are not looking to reveal the details of what transpired".

 

If Steve was booted due to "negatives", aren't you in fact hiding them(the details that is, other than the non-display of the logo)?

 

No, we are absolutely not. Steve refused to cooperate with the investigation and, with full knowledge of what would happen if he did not (it was discussed repeatedly), he was expelled. The allegations against him were neither confirmed nor denied, and we are not going to publish unproven allegations or else we would be as bad as some of our detractors above believe we are.

 

[awe4one]

Temporarily replaced by an unscrupulous robot Steve Meyer?

 

Probably his kid on the computer again...

 

Jim

[Silver Surfer]

I know a little bit about the situation. I always viewed Steve as a guy that would do the right thing and was a good representative of NOD but ignoring emails for the length of time strikes me as weird. If he was at odds with NOD's core responsibilities as a member or if he did or didn't do anything wrong then perhaps he should handled this better and maybe answered an email or two. I'm not a NOD member but this seems like a bit of a slap in the face to the organization and its members.

[Ze-man]

Hey Mark, I just think there was initially some confusion surrounding why Steve was asked to leave.. or left. When Naiman resigned there was a lenghty post detailing the situation.

 

So when people(myself included) saw that Steve was expelled, it of course made everyone curious as to what happened since we all know him, have dealt with.. or will perhaps deal with him in the future. It came as a shock actually

 

I didn't take it as much that you were hiding anything about it, but rather just not being as explanatory as you were with the Naiman situation. But after reading this thread and talking with Zip I understand the situation a little better now. I hope you can also understand how it might have looked to those on the outside.

 

It all just seemed a bit abrupt.

 

Interesting day on the ol chat board. Well lunch is over for me.. later all.

 

Ze-

[buttock]

Temporarily replaced by an unscrupulous robot Steve Meyer?

 

Probably his kid on the computer again...

 

Jim

 

Or drunk. He hasn't used that excuse in a while.

[MrBedrock]

Due process is a wonderful thing!

 

This next question is posed simply to stick a stick in an ant pile(but that is what I do).

The NOD made the decision to expel a member based on the fact that the member was uncommunicative and not because it was proven that the member actually did anything wrong. Are current members now more aware, and fearful, of the Wrath of NOD?

[joeypost]

I find the short suspension period troubling........

 

Why? Seriously.

 

As unlikely as it may be, he could have been out of town, sunning in the tropics or something.

 

That may be but all PM's were at least read with no response. At best an "I no longer wish to be a member reply" would have been sufficient. I regards to Steve, I hope nothing has happened that would not allow him to reply, but given the evidence we have it appears he chooses not to.