How hard is it to get kicked out of NOD?

[MrBedrock]

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.

 

 

 

 

[Calamerica]

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.

 

 

 

 

if one wants to walk the walk, talk the talk, actions DO speak louder than words...

 

CAL

[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.

 

Glad you asked Richard.

 

As a NOD Committee Member let me state that anyone who joins an organization should be proud to belong as it is presumably something they believe in, and the display of that organization's logo is an important function of the membership. Most organization have rules, and when they do the organization expects that the member will abide by them. Failure to do so will result in a variety of actions by the organization.

 

In light of the fact that you obviously have no knowledge of the circumstances regarding which you are commenting upon, let me state that in this particular case the primary issue was a failure to cooperate in an investigation of perceived rule violations. That pretty much says it all right there. The NOD views its principles with a great degree of seriousness, and if it cannot trust its members to cooperate when allegations exist regarding whether significant rules have been violated, then that raises understandable concerns that require action. The circumstances in this matter unfortunately resulted in expulsion, although there were various other options short of that step that were open for exploration.

 

The logo issue was peripheral and merely compounded the situation further so that it was deserving of note. By itself it was a minor infraction that no doubt would have been timely resolved and likely would not have become the subject of any specific action other than an e-mail reminder. Of course, we respect Steve Meyer's privacy and are not looking to reveal the details of what transpired. He is, of course, able to do so if he wishes and you can ask him if you want.

 

Speaking for myself, it is disappointing, of course, that yet another post you proffer regarding the NOD - an organization that wishes to only promote disclosure and integrity within our hobby just as numerous parallel organizations undertake in other major hobbies - continues to wreak of open disdain and sarcasm, but at least you wear those feelings on your sleeves for everyone to see and judge for themselves.

[piper]

 

 

[MrBedrock]

Speaking for myself, it is disappointing, of course, that yet another post you proffer regarding the NOD - an organization that wishes to only promote disclosure and integrity within our hobby just as numerous parallel organizations undertake in other major hobbies - continues to wreak of open disdain and sarcasm, but at least you wear those feelings on your sleeves for everyone to see and judge for themselves.

 

Speaking for myself, how could I possibly contain my disdain for an organization whose members would sell each other out simply for the purpose of improving their position within said organization. And since I obviously have no knowledge of the situation, please explain to me (and all reading) exactly what proof you have that this former NOD member's books were pressed before submission to CGC and their susquent listing on eBay.(I use former NOD member out of respect for his privacy). You couldn't possibly have booted him simply because he refused to take part in your investigation. If so, then it sounds like you booted him before he got a chance to quit. That sounds very mature.

(Remember, Mark, we are just discussing here. Nothing personal.)

[esquirecomics]

Speaking for myself, it is disappointing, of course, that yet another post you proffer regarding the NOD - an organization that wishes to only promote disclosure and integrity within our hobby just as numerous parallel organizations undertake in other major hobbies - continues to wreak of open disdain and sarcasm, but at least you wear those feelings on your sleeves for everyone to see and judge for themselves.

 

Speaking for myself, how could I possibly contain my disdain for an organization whose members would sell each other out simply for the purpose of improving their position within said organization. And since I obviously have no knowledge of the situation, please explain to me (and all reading) exactly what proof you have that this former NOD member's books were pressed before submission to CGC and their susquent listing on eBay.(I use former NOD member out of respect for his privacy). You couldn't possibly have booted him simply because he refused to take part in your investigation. If so, then it sounds like you booted him before he got a chance to quit. That sounds very mature.

(Remember, Mark, we are just discussing here. Nothing personal.)

 

As you acknowledge, you write on things you know nothing about Richard. Your speculative allegations and characterizations above are simply inaccurate.

 

The decision to expel Mr. Meyer was a fully reasoned one that the NOD leadership struggled with for some time, and it involved repeated and professional communications with Mr. Meyer. It would be entirely inappropriate of me to reveal those details out of respect for Mr. Meyer and the sanctity of the process. You are certainly welcome to contact him directly and if he wishes to disclose (no pun intended) the circumstances of what transpired there are certainly no restrictions upon him doing so.

 

Suffice it to say that no organization is worth its salt if it does not enforce its own rules, and that is exactly what occurred in this instance. NOD members voluntarily join the organization, and in doing so they voluntarily agree to abide by certain policies and requirements. Failure to do so can result in a variety of coordinated actions. Your open disdain for such a democratic process is puzzling.

[MrBedrock]

It would be entirely inappropriate of me to reveal those details out of respect for Mr. Meyer and the sanctity of the process.

 

Suffice it to say that no organization is worth its salt if it does not enforce its own rules, and that is exactly what occurred in this instance. NOD members voluntarily join the organization, and in doing so they voluntarily agree to abide by certain policies and requirements. Failure to do so can result in a variety of coordinated actions. Your open disdain for such a democratic process is puzzling.

 

If you can honestly say that there is any SANCTITY to the NOD's democratic decision making process then you should definitely understand my disdain.

[Aman619]

...and the sanctity of the process.

 

misqute noted.

 

the process, not the NOD was referred to.

[tth2]

Why do you even care, Richard? You generally consider NOD to be a worthless organization, so why would you care that someone is no longer in it?

 

If you want to say that you don't think Steve is guilty of what NOD has accused him of, and perhaps your reasons why you think so, then just say it.

[Red Hook]

That sounds like a reasonable request.

[Calamerica]

That sounds like a reasonable request.

 

I agree.

 

easy.

 

CAL

[Calamerica]

Speaking for myself, it is disappointing, of course, that yet another post you proffer regarding the NOD - an organization that wishes to only promote disclosure and integrity within our hobby just as numerous parallel organizations undertake in other major hobbies - continues to wreak of open disdain and sarcasm, but at least you wear those feelings on your sleeves for everyone to see and judge for themselves.

 

Speaking for myself, how could I possibly contain my disdain for an organization whose members would sell each other out simply for the purpose of improving their position within said organization. And since I obviously have no knowledge of the situation, please explain to me (and all reading) exactly what proof you have that this former NOD member's books were pressed before submission to CGC and their susquent listing on eBay.(I use former NOD member out of respect for his privacy). You couldn't possibly have booted him simply because he refused to take part in your investigation. If so, then it sounds like you booted him before he got a chance to quit. That sounds very mature.

(Remember, Mark, we are just discussing here. Nothing personal.)

 

As you acknowledge, you write on things you know nothing about Richard. Your speculative allegations and characterizations above are simply inaccurate.

 

The decision to expel Mr. Meyer was a fully reasoned one that the NOD leadership struggled with for some time, and it involved repeated and professional communications with Mr. Meyer. It would be entirely inappropriate of me to reveal those details out of respect for Mr. Meyer and the sanctity of the process. You are certainly welcome to contact him directly and if he wishes to disclose (no pun intended) the circumstances of what transpired there are certainly no restrictions upon him doing so.

 

Suffice it to say that no organization is worth its salt if it does not enforce its own rules, and that is exactly what occurred in this instance. NOD members voluntarily join the organization, and in doing so they voluntarily agree to abide by certain policies and requirements. Failure to do so can result in a variety of coordinated actions. Your open disdain for such a democratic process is puzzling.

 

well worded!

 

CAL

[GACollectibles]

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?

[Jeffro.]

Who! Who doesn't want to display the NOD logo?!!??!!!!?

 

[DrWatson]

If you can honestly say that there is any SANCTITY to the NOD's democratic decision making process then you should definitely understand my disdain.

Reminds me of the Salem witch trials.

[chrisco37]

Who! Who doesn't want to display the NOD logo?!!??!!!!?

 

 

lol Now that was funny!

 

(I wish I had that little rolling on the floor laughing graemlin)

[qualitycomix]

As Mark said, the NOD logo being displayed or not is a very minor thing, and is not the reason why this former NOD member was expelled from the organization.

 

In this case, this person signed up to the NOD and agreed to it's bylaws. When a simple question was asked about a specific book via PM, this person refused to answer.

 

He actually ignored all PMs and emails from various NOD members. The question was concerning a core disclosure issue on a book, and thus an answer was necessary. Witch hunt? huh? How else would you expect an organization to find out if a violation had occurred? Or maybe we just ignore it and get crucified later on for turning a blind eye? If this person had answered the question, then that would have been sufficient.

 

Instead they ignored all of the PMs and emails sent over a period of a week, which left the committee no choice but to proceed accordingly, without any explanation from the member.

[buttock]

Good stuff Jeffro.

 

Now I want to hear what Meyer has to say.

[Flaming_Telepath]

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.

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, Richard, but on this, you are waaaaaaaaaay out of line.

 

You would be the first to scream blue murder if a NOD member was involved in something suspicious, and use it as an opportunity to push your own agenda.

 

However, when NOD police themselves (no old boys network in place here, it appears) and deny you that opportunity, you belittle them and use it as an opportunity to push your own agenda.

 

It's sorta damned if they do, damned if they don't, with you, isn't it?

[DrWatson]

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.