N9THX Reactivated

[LimeyMk1]

Nathan's account has been reactivated after the conclusion of his court case with GTS Chris.

To clarify the previous status of his account it was suspended rather than banned.

Our apologies to Nathan for the crossed wires.

[Steve-O 2007]

what was the court case about or are we not allowed to know?

[LimeyMk1]

what was the court case about or are we not allowed to know?

Soz I should have included the link

http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=147841

[Steve-O 2007]

what was the court case about or are we not allowed to know?

Soz I should have included the link

http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=147841

ahh that one. What was the out come or are we not allowed to know that part?

[Tsia]

It went in Nathan's favour, I believe.

[LimeyMk1]

It went in Nathan's favour, I believe.

Yup, I'm not aware of the fine details though.

[elbon50]

So on what grounds was Nathan suspended ?

Was GTSChris also suspended ?

[jasongtr]

from what i read on here it was down to N9THX talking about the case a lot on here before it was decided, GTS chris as far as i can tell wasnt suspended

all of that of course could be balls

[LimeyMk1]

Aye Nathan was suspended more for his own protection than anything else, we thought that discussion and publication of details could potentially jeopardise the court case.

Hope that answers all the questions.

[madbasshunter]

Did I imagine Nathan replying here the other day ?

[dazzz]

I recall that also.

Seems extremely fishy to me.

As paying member I feel an explanation is needed?

[Peter Gidden]

As paying member I feel an explanation is needed?

IIRC, he posted a statement based on nothing other than hearsay and of no relevance to anyone except a 3rd party and a trader.

Hence it was deleted.

[dazzz]

I'd say it was relevant. As a premium member I want to know how traders affiliated with imoc handle situations when they go wrong. I want to know if other members are having issues before I make a purchase and suffer the same fate.

Any moron can send out a good part from a shelf but the real valuable knowledge is how they treat their customers when things go to court.

IMO if a trader affiliated with imoc cannot handle their business without it getting to court action then that says everything. Sometimes court action cannot be avoided. Lets read between the lines though and apply some common sense.

I've heard traders on here make statements about other products purely on hear say. We all make assumptions from research and recommendations. That is the whole point of a forum, to discuss and share our knowledge.

I'd say the comments were removed due to imoc being xxxx scared of having legal action taken against them and the trader fees not being paid again.

We're the premium members and we pay for imoc. We enable the traders to sell their products to us. We the premium members are 100% the most important part of imoc and should be protected as such and be allowed to protect each other.

I ve always recommended imoc and its traders to new owners . I've always recommended sbits. I will continue to recommend sbits. I know of owners who have used affiliated traders based on my recommendations.

[Peter Gidden]

I'd say it was relevant. As a premium member I want to know how traders affiliated with imoc handle situations when they go wrong. I want to know if other members are having issues before I make a purchase and suffer the same fate.

Any moron can send out a good part from a shelf but the real valuable knowledge is how they treat their customers when things go to court.

IMO if a trader affiliated with imoc cannot handle their business without it getting to court action then that says everything. Sometimes court action cannot be avoided. Lets read between the lines though and apply some common sense.

I've heard traders on here make statements about other products purely on hear say. We all make assumptions from research and recommendations. That is the whole point of a forum, to discuss and share our knowledge.

I'd say the comments were removed due to imoc being xxxx scared of having legal action taken against them and the trader fees not being paid again.

We're the premium members and we pay for imoc. We enable the traders to sell their products to us. We the premium members are 100% the most important part of imoc and should be protected as such and be allowed to protect each other.

I ve always recommended imoc and its traders to new owners . I've always recommended sbits. I will continue to recommend sbits. I know of owners who have used affiliated traders based on my recommendations.

You make some valid comments Dazz.

The following comments are IMHO. Maybe a forum Admin may come along and post comments on behalf of IMOC.

1) The post was not posted by the complainant as it needs to be and was was nothing more than hearsay.

2) There are forum rules regarding how to deal with complaints about affiliate traders.

The original post did not comply with (1) or (2) therefore it was deleted.

[Ryan S]

sad that this issue went as far as court, could have been avoided really GTSChris has/had a cracking reputation too.

[dazzz]

I'd say it was relevant. As a premium member I want to know how traders affiliated with imoc handle situations when they go wrong. I want to know if other members are having issues before I make a purchase and suffer the same fate.

Any moron can send out a good part from a shelf but the real valuable knowledge is how they treat their customers when things go to court.

IMO if a trader affiliated with imoc cannot handle their business without it getting to court action then that says everything. Sometimes court action cannot be avoided. Lets read between the lines though and apply some common sense.

I've heard traders on here make statements about other products purely on hear say. We all make assumptions from research and recommendations. That is the whole point of a forum, to discuss and share our knowledge.

I'd say the comments were removed due to imoc being xxxx scared of having legal action taken against them and the trader fees not being paid again.

We're the premium members and we pay for imoc. We enable the traders to sell their products to us. We the premium members are 100% the most important part of imoc and should be protected as such and be allowed to protect each other.

I ve always recommended imoc and its traders to new owners . I've always recommended sbits. I will continue to recommend sbits. I know of owners who have used affiliated traders based on my recommendations.

You make some valid comments Dazz.

The following comments are IMHO. Maybe a forum Admin may come along and post comments on behalf of IMOC.

1) The post was not posted by the complainant as it needs to be and was was nothing more than hearsay.

2) There are forum rules regarding how to deal with complaints about affiliate traders.

The original post did not comply with (1) or (2) therefore it was deleted.

Would it be possible for you Pete ,or anyone else,to point me in the direction of these rules?

[Peter Gidden]

Would it be possible for you Pete ,or anyone else,to point me in the direction of these rules?

http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=94989

[dazzz]

I new you would post those rules.

If we're going to follow the rules then I'd have to point out Pete, those rules you have posted refer to posting in the trader feedback forum.

I will however quote the most defining get out clues for imoc from the posted rules.

"If someone starts a thread about an Affiliates's goods/services anywhere other than TF - the thread will be deleted or moved at the Moderator's discretion "

1) the thread was not started about an affiliates goods or services.

2) Do we even need to expand on 'moderators discretion'.

Seems to me the discretion of moderators is used to protect traders and not the members.

I know other premium members who feel the same but are worried the moderators may use their discretion to ban them if they post there true findings and ongoing problems.

[Peter Gidden]

If we're going to follow the rules then I'd have to point out Pete, those rules you have posted refer to posting in the trader feedback forum.

"If someone starts a thread about an Affiliates's goods/services anywhere other than TF - the thread will be deleted or moved at the Moderator's discretion "

And IMHO, the OP knew that ife he posted in TF it would be deleted, so he posted elsewhere.

the thread was not started about an affiliates goods or services.

But the post was, which is why only the post was deleted.

Since i am not a moderator, i can't comment on mods' discretional powers.

[dazzz]

If we're going to follow the rules then I'd have to point out Pete, those rules you have posted refer to posting in the trader feedback forum.

"If someone starts a thread about an Affiliates's goods/services anywhere other than TF - the thread will be deleted or moved at the Moderator's discretion "

And IMHO, the OP knew that ife he posted in TF it would be deleted, so he posted elsewhere.

the thread was not started about an affiliates goods or services.

But the post was, which is why only the post was deleted.

Since i am not a moderator, i can't comment on mods' discretional powers.

Surely not posting it in TF because it would be removed is following the rules.

Was his post about the goods and/or services or the fact he had been contacted by an unhappy member who now had to also now take this said affiliate to court.

We can go through the rules and argue both sides but the fish smell is still strong as ever.