Harty SOCKS it to the NSC LICKERS (& Hyypia) in the Herald this week

[Triggaaar]

"I’m not for one minute suggesting that Paul Barber, or anyone else at the club is controlling or censoring the forum, but as emotions run high certain threads have been deemed controversial /libellous by moderators and have been removed." TRUE one controversial thread was deleted. And TRUE Harty is not suggesting that NSC is being controlled by Barber. Hence his first sentence.

So which bit should he be apologising for fellow mods?

Was a thread deleted for being controversial, rather than libelous?

And "I’m not for one minute suggesting that Paul Barber, or anyone else at the club is controlling or censoring the forum, but as emotions run high certain threads have been deemed controversial /libellous by moderators and have been removed." reads to me like he is suggesting the club are censoring the forum.

EDIT - Reading the posts after yours, it seems mine is a repeat of others, but that wasn't intentional.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

So was the moderator ever arrested and interviewed? I ask this because if it was a criminal case what was the offence being investigated? If the moderator was being accused of a criminal matter they would require to be interviewed under caution, usually following arrest or occasionally by voluntarily attending the police station. I presume you mention the potential punishment for effect since they are only a guideline for the most serious examples of any given offence, they are rarely enforced to their maximum limit and since the courts are routinely not imprisoning even prolific thieves, sex offenders and other such criminals I wouldnt be remotely concerned about the potential for imprisonment.

If the moderator was never officially interviewed under caution i would suggest the tale you refer to was just a threat of legal action and just that with the person/plaintiff pushing for action trying to influence certain decisions. Also being a chief executive of a local authority would give you no greater sway with the CPS than you or I have, the CPS make decisions on the weight of evidence not what job you have.

The alleged offence was Harassment, contrary to Section 4 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (Putting People in Fear of Violence). The procedure began with an invitation by the police (an Inspector), by e-mail, to remove a number of posts from North Stand Chat, because they were considered offensive by the complainant (who was the Chief Executive of a local authority). The moderator refused to remove the posts and advised the police Inspector that they would not be removed. The police then advised that the matter had been referred to the Crown Prosecution Service and that prosecution would be likely, if the posts were not removed. The moderator took legal advice (from Bindman and Co, the UK's leading civil liberties lawyers) and advised the police that, should they wish to make an arrest, they should be prepared to deal with Bindman's. This seems to have caused Sussex Police some difficulties and they made no progress in taking the matter forward, other than to continue to press the moderator to remove the offending posts. The police reported that they continued to be under pressure from the complainant to achieve this outcome.

Matters dragged on for some months and requests from the moderator for information about whether the case was still live were met with statements that it was. The Crown Prosecution Service confirmed this, although it subsequently became clear that the CPS were not convinced that the case for prosecution had been made.

Rather bizarrely, although I was not the moderator involved, I was eventually told by a Brighton based police officer that the matter had been dropped and I was able to pass this message on to the moderator who was at the centre of all this.

As hans kraay fan club says, it's not just the formalities of the legal processes, "its the ballache of dealing with lawyer's letters, legal threats, threats of violence , and general unnecessary bullshit". This case dragged on for months and months.

 

[portlock seagull]

After LBs comments above, who'd be a Mod or site owner eh? Respect guys, it's not the number of actual cases that make it to court but the threats to take it to, no doubt throwing weight around without intention but how do you know it will end without costing? It's the way the legal system works - money talks! Always has. Always will. On balance - for any picky types (and by the way, I'm not interested in your arguments contrary)

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

All the mods were doing so well with their light-hearted jokes and anecdotes but one doesn't quite get the memo and decides to check out/doxx this inconvenient-opinioned poster.

You know these insinuations of being club poodles will all go away quickly if you stop acting so thin-skinned, right?

Let's not forget the bigger picture that the exposed banned poster is an offensive tool in their hybrid existence.

 

[The Fifth Column]

The alleged offence was Harassment, contrary to Section 4 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (Putting People in Fear of Violence). The procedure began with an invitation by the police (an Inspector), by e-mail, to remove a number of posts from North Stand Chat, because they were considered offensive by the complainant (who was the Chief Executive of a local authority). The moderator refused to remove the posts and advised the police Inspector that they would not be removed. The police then advised that the matter had been referred to the Crown Prosecution Service and that prosecution would be likely, if the posts were not removed. The moderator took legal advice (from Bindman and Co, the UK's leading civil liberties lawyers) and advised the police that, should they wish to make an arrest, they should be prepared to deal with Bindman's. This seems to have caused Sussex Police some difficulties and they made no progress in taking the matter forward, other than to continue to press the moderator to remove the offending posts. The police reported that they continued to be under pressure from the complainant to achieve this outcome.

Matters dragged on for some months and requests from the moderator for information about whether the case was still live were met with statements that it was. The Crown Prosecution Service confirmed this, although it subsequently became clear that the CPS were not convinced that the case for prosecution had been made.

Rather bizarrely, although I was not the moderator involved, I was eventually told by a Brighton based police officer that the matter had been dropped and I was able to pass this message on to the moderator who was at the centre of all this.

As hans kraay fan club says, it's not just the formalities of the legal processes, "its the ballache of dealing with lawyer's letters, legal threats, threats of violence , and general unnecessary bullshit". This case dragged on for months and months.

Thanks LB for taking the time to clarify that. I'm not trying to be an arse and i appreciate the 'threats' of legal action can be a real ballache. That particular case sounds like the complainant tried to call in a favour from his inspector mate and certainly doesnt sound like correct procedures for investgation were followed! Of course the police have a duty to investigate potential criminal matters whether they are genuine or not (as your example clearly seems to have been borne out of malice more than anything else). I strongly suspect the police never commenced an official criminal investigation since the moderator was never officially questioned, what is likely is that they presented the facts to the CPS to ask for guidance to see if there was a case to answer, i say this because the law and the internet have yet to catch up with each other and your standard copper hasnt a clue ( no fault on their part) what constitutes an offence in relation to activity on the internet. The investigation such as it was probably took months due to the simple fact that the police have to wait anything up to 6 months for CPS to give them any kind response such is the backlog and sheer workload of the CPS! I would suggest that the police set out to simply 'have a word' and get the situation resolved fairly swiftly only for it to spiral out of their control particularly with a complainant who probably wouldnt take no for an answer and was baying for blood!

** Edit. In my experience most cases of Harrassment are resolved by way of a police warning letter or caution, only the most serious sustained harrasment cases, usually with a domestic violence angle, would end up with a custodial sentence and even a lot of those cases are dealt with various court orders without the need for imprisonment. The police and other parties however do employ a lot of scaremongering to coerce people into complying with their requests!!

 

[Dirk Lehmann's Python]

Very much NOT this. Barber posting on here would be a TERRIBLE idea. Truly a dreadful idea. No possible good could come from the binfests that would ensue every time we didn't win 5-0. Look how Palace's board embarass themselves on the BBS.

If he wished to answer questions via the Ask The Club forum, I could see that working - but even then he'd be better doing it through insider.

As it is he addresses a range of posts via Bozza. this seems way, way more sensible than getting drawn into slanging matches he can't possibly win, and wasting hours in here like the rest of us.

And that way Bozza can play the "Im superior with my great contacts" card and you can back him up on every thread - everyone's a winner! What's the difference between a slanging match caused by Barber and, er, this entire thread and a newspaper column of Barber/Bozza bashing?

Goodness me, we know everyone does a great job running this site but it would be nice to see a few mods who dare to have an opinion every now and agian.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Thanks LB for taking the time to clarify that. I'm not trying to be an arse and i appreciate the 'threats' of legal action can be a real ballache. That particular case sounds like the complainant tried to call in a favour from his inspector mate and certainly doesnt sound like correct procedures for investgation were followed! Of course the police have a duty to investigate potential criminal matters whether they are genuine or not (as your example clearly seems to have been borne out of malice more than anything else). I strongly suspect the police never commenced an official criminal investigation since the moderator was never officially questioned, what is likely is that they presented the facts to the CPS to ask for guidance to see of there was a case to answer, i say this because the law and the internet have yet to catch up with each other and your standard copper hasnt a clue ( no fault on their part) what constitutes an offence in relation to activity on the internet. The investigation such as it was probably took months due to the simple fact that the police have to wait anything up to 6 months for CPS to give them any kind response such is the backlog and sheer workload of the CPS! I would suggest that the police set out to simply 'have a word' and get the situation resolved fairly swiftly only for it to spiral out of their control particularly with a complainant who probably wouldnt take no for an answer and was baying for blood!

** Edit. In my experience most cases of Harrassment are resolved by way of a police warning letter or caution, only the most serious sustained harrasment cases, usually with a domestic violence angle, would end up with a custodial sentence and even a lot of those cases are dealt with various court orders without the need for imprisonment. The police and other parties however do emoloy a lot of scaremongering to coerce people into complying with their requests!!

I wouldn't disagree with any of that.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

And that way Bozza can play the "Im superior with my great contacts" card and you can back him up on every thread - everyone's a winner! What's the difference between a slanging match caused by Barber and, er, this entire thread and a newspaper column of Barber/Bozza bashing?

Goodness me, we know everyone does a great job running this site but it would be nice to see a few mods who dare to have an opinion every now and agian.

There is one mod with views very much opposed to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] 's in this very thread. Does he not count?

Fwiw I have pretty strong opinions, and express them often in various threads. Given that I see what goes into running the site and take a part in dealing with the nonsense, is it really a surprise that my opinions on this particular matter are aligned with most of the others?

At least, unlike some, I don't hide my opinions behind a second account...

 

[El Presidente]

There is one mod with views very much opposed to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] 's in this very thread. Does he not count?

Fwiw I have pretty strong opinions, and express them often in various threads. Given that I see what goes into running the site and take a part in dealing with the nonsense, is it really a surprise that my opinions on this particular matter are aligned with most of the others?

At least, unlike some, I don't hide my opinions behind a second account...

Neither do I, I hide my views through my third account.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Neither do I, I hide my views through my third account.

Good point.

 

[portlock seagull]

LOL!

 

[LamieRobertson]

There is one mod with views very much opposed to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] 's in this very thread. Does he not count?

Fwiw I have pretty strong opinions, and express them often in various threads. Given that I see what goes into running the site and take a part in dealing with the nonsense, is it really a surprise that my opinions on this particular matter are aligned with most of the others?

At least, unlike some, I don't hide my opinions behind a second account...

I'd second that and disagree with most of them but only through my tenth account

 

[daveyboy1973]

And that way Bozza can play the "Im superior with my great contacts" card and you can back him up on every thread - everyone's a winner! What's the difference between a slanging match caused by Barber and, er, this entire thread and a newspaper column of Barber/Bozza bashing?

Goodness me, we know everyone does a great job running this site but it would be nice to see a few mods who dare to have an opinion every now and agian.

Not hans kraay who it would seem is his personal bodyguard

 

[Dirk Lehmann's Python]

There is one mod with views very much opposed to [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] 's in this very thread. Does he not count?

Fwiw I have pretty strong opinions, and express them often in various threads. Given that I see what goes into running the site and take a part in dealing with the nonsense, is it really a surprise that my opinions on this particular matter are aligned with most of the others?

At least, unlike some, I don't hide my opinions behind a second account...

What's there to hide?

 

[The Large One]

Very much this. Unless of course there is a certain element of "look at me, Paul Barber speaks to me, I'm important and know lots of what is going on at the club" behind it which I doubt is the reason

You think that Paul Barber speaking to Bozza - or to anyone for that matter - makes them feel important...?

Blimey, what a weird way to view the world.

 

[Black Rod]

You think that Paul Barber speaking to Bozza - or to anyone for that matter - makes them feel important...?

Blimey, what a weird way to view the world.

You tell me. From what I remember you took great pride in telling everyone everything Dick Knight ever told you. "Dick said this", "Dick did that". The best thing to come of him relinquishing control was arguably not Bloom's millions building a stadium but that we didn't have to put up with the "I'm on first name terms with the chairman" stuff anymore

 

[Working class pride]

I dont understand why some people have a problem with the club using NSC via a mod (whoever the individual) to communicate. I think we are very lucky that Barber ect take the time to do so. It also seems to be the same people who will try and see a problem about BHA disclosing its attendance in the same way that every club in the country does. I have to wonder why, after losing the Goldstone some people are so cheesed off.

Sure the team is under performing, but ever was thus. The team has never matched the support. Bloom is trying to change that and yes mistakes have been made by players, managers ect, but at times some people on NSC remind me of Life of Brian.. now what has Tony Bloom ever done for us..? Well there is a 100 Million ground, oh yes but apart from a £100 Million ground, what has TB ever done for us, well there is covering £10 Million of over spend every year, all right but apart from... ect ect.

 

[Mackenzie]

Anyone got an alternative for Pringles? I'm getting fed up with them.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Harty should rightfully receive plaudits for his work against a former regime, but those plaudits can be eroded by his current musings, no? Or does he have a carte blanche to say what he feels and face zero consequences?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Anyone got an alternative for Pringles? I'm getting fed up with them.

Dry roast peanuts?