Skip to main content
000798 000801 000804 000807 000810 000813 000816 000819 000822 000825 000828 000831 000834 000837 000840 000843 000846 000849 000852 000855 000858 000861 000864 000867 000870 000873 000876 000879 000882 000883
English French German Italian Spanish

Whatever happened to A.J.D.

Curiosity is a strange thing, I remember reading a lot of articles by Anna Jeannette Dixon many moons ago but not too recently. Sometimes she could be a little how you say 'different' in her replies to people and her spelling was muxed ip, but does anyone know why she has disappeard from the N.O.C. ?

Permalink

I wouldn't presume to speak for her, but perhaps she just got fed up with all the kickbacks she gets.

None of us know everything there is to know about our beloved Nortons, but I think we all enjoy sharing our knowledge and experiences to try and help others out. Not everybody is a master wordsmith, or is capable of knocking out a 5 star thesis every time.

So long as responses are polite, I am always content to have any of my contributions corrected by superior intellects.

Lets all just be happy that we share a love for our bikes, even if we don't always get the right words out.

Permalink

This issue has been discussed before on this Forum.

Some time ago now AJD fell foul of the PC surrounding a certain S Garner, the previous NOC Admin & the Rules of the Club. Consequently her membership of the NOC was seriously restricted and many of its membership privileges denied her.

But..........time has passed, Garner has sold the company, the NOC now has a company status run by a different crowd of members and I think that Anna has served her time and her suspension should be reconsidered.

Permalink

I spoke to her on the phone a couple of weeks ago, and can confirm that she is alive and has a lot to say....

:-)

Paul

Permalink

Any of us who criticised the lowlife Garner were chastised and threatened by the EC, almost gave up my own membership but been here 40 years almost and been a pita most of that time so decided that the old Latin maxim Nil Illigitimi Carborundum stood true for the NOC as well as life in general so still here 

Gino

Permalink

Yes, welcome Anna back but in moderation. It wasn't just her comments on Garner but she was rather outspoken in her own inimitable way on immigrants causing some upset. Were it not for immigrants, no Velocettes, no Triumphs.

Permalink

That,s awful, some good friends of mine around here are immigrants, from Manchester, Sicily, Poland, Belgium, Cornwall. Top people but Garner not one of them..

I think her quirky dialogue was a function of a natural dyslexic problem, not a contrived attempt to be seen as a "character" like on some forums.

Permalink

I am a little reluctant to enter this discussion and am only doing so for there to be an accurate version of events on our website.  An earlier concern was Anna's propensity to run down 961's, not having owned or ridden one. Some criticism of course was entirely legitmate, but with Anna it got to the point where it was really upsetting owners of the bike who were no doubt concerned that such publicity might effect the saleability of their Nortons. It was not about Mr Garner per se. This in any case is not the reason why Anna is now denied posting rights.

Following a number of requests and warnings and an agreement by Anna, she persisted in posting material that had nothing to do with Norton's or the Club and were contrary to the website rules.

This is not a question of censorship, all members are free to post within the agreed rules, but this forum is not the place to air political or conspiracy theories or indeed anything that does not relate to the aims and objectives of the Club.

Personally I regret that Anna could not conform with what is a reasonable position on the purpose of the forum, she made many useful and positive comments and if only she could have kept those we could all still be benefitting from her input.

 

Permalink

I miss her posts mostly, and wonder if she is willing to abide by the rules or will the leopard never change it's spots.?

Oh and Michael I was not having a pop at her for her muxed ip language in her posts and it is superior knowledge, not intellect when you are corrected.

Permalink

I too would like to see Anna  return , I doubt she has changed  much, so it might be short and sweet.  She is a tough   brave  old lady , Norton through and through ,  from a long line of  real motorcyclists .  Very excentric  and dyslexic  but  with   a cosiderable depth of  know how  from  another century.  Always going to upset someone .  Never going to be PC , Had good instincts when it came to Garner.   Just a fair bit more excentric than many of us.  I think she lives a bit isolated and is not in the best of health. I hope her local club is in touch.

Permalink

Tis the season of 'Peace on Earth and good will to all men.'

Let's see some good will; NOC. 

A nice Christmas present for the girl........

 

 

Permalink

 If I was to break down or fall off and  snap a footrest  ,  a can't imagine anywhere better than  pushing distance from Anna's.    She would have you fixed up pronto. The same goes for most on this forum .

Permalink

.. she could be a bit rough on people she didn't agree with but a great source of helpful ideas eg the Kawasaki prop stand.

And of course she was perfectly correct about Garner. If she has been banned I think that is a great shame and I for one would welcome her back. Of course she may not wish to be a member of any club that would have her....

Permalink

A rough count of the positive comments within this thread indicate that the greater majority of  members would like to see Anna re-instated back to full NOC membership and its privileges. As Neil suggests.......  that would be a great Christmas present to her. 

Those of us that know AJD well, understand that she is often outspoken, dogmatic and does not generally take prisoners when she knows she has the true facts at hand. But like all of us, occasionally she gets it wrong and sometimes deserves to get a hand smacked.

Tim Harrison enlightened us with details about why the Club took the action it did but I and others would like to know if Anna has actually been handed a 'life' sentence???

My Christmas card to the NOC Directors will include a P.S. asking for clemency for Anna and I urge all other members to do something similar..

Permalink

We are not a Dictatorship Country, and freedom of speech is allowed. I’ve always taken with a pinch of salt what Anna used to bleat on about, but her heart always in the right place.

Let’s have Anna back, and hear more about Norton Manxman’s!

Permalink

I stopped reading Anna's posts, too many crackpot theories, but I could see her posts and just pass by without reading them as her name was at the top of her posts. If you don't like them don't read them and yes allow her back as some do want to read them.

Permalink

Most members are too polite to say anything, especially if there is an apparent consensus. I don't think that the absence of resistance actually signifies approval of a return. It was an exceedingly tiresome situation to which years of trying had brought no improvement.

There was a paranoid conspiracy theory about everything..and then that stubborn refusal to use a spell-checker.

If a return is truly contemplated, could I ask that the message board incorporate a Facebook-style system allowing us to 'hide' posts from selected individuals ?

Phil..Do any of us have 'Full NOC Membership with privileges' any more ? Aren't we simply customers of a limited company these days ?

Permalink

Everywhere you look these days it seems freedom of speech is under threat,  I think we should be above all that , and set  an example in our little corner . 

Permalink

Freedom of speech v censorship?

I have a lifetime ban from the vmcc forum because a so called moderator didn't like what I wrote, even though every word was true. Julian Assange only reported the truth and yet he looks to spend a lifetime incarcerated in solitary. It is truth under attack in the final analysis. Untrue or unproven statements should be removed, I have no issue with that.

In today's political climate, it is not so much our freedoms are taken from us but rather some of the people are giving them away. Mandate v the power of saying NO ! IE Freedom of choice and what happened to 'my body my choice.' Tell that to the members in Austria....

Back on topic, I think the club should come clean (Thank you Tim for an indication) as to why Anna has been silenced, since she has been prevented from making her own statement.

Yes Robert, lets set an example and allow that freedom.  Problem is one might have to change platforms after being taken down by big tech....The real world we are existing under. BTW: spouting conspiracy theory is a form of self censorship.

Peace on Earth, but start with truth on Earth.

Permalink

I would like to see Anna back on the forum she is very outspoken but I don't find that a problem. I also think she is a qualified Marine Engineer which is showen in the depth of knowledge she demonstrates.

As far as dyslexia goes it is not a sign of a lack of intelligence it's just a brain that is hard-wired differently (I speak from experience) and often brings exceptional skills in fault finding and thinking outside of the box.

So let's have her back in the club so we can all benefit from her abilitys. 

Permalink

Another vote for Anna back on the forum, though I wouldn't blame her if she didn't want to come back.

Is she still a NOC member?

Permalink

Another positive vote for AJD's return from a relative newbie. 

Her knowledge is part of the valued resource of the forum. Life would be boring without the "individuals".

In reply to by philip_hannam1

Permalink

I was also unfavorably surprised when S.GARDNER was in the central committee, for me it was a mixture of genres: business and philosophy of a club. On the other hand, somewhat reluctantly, I had understood that the club's statutes had to be changed following the dispute with Andover Norton. Anna Jeannette DIXON has her own way of expressing herself, that did not bother me, I think she should be able to come back here on this forum now.

Sorry for my poor english language.

Permalink

And your English is perfectly legible. Well said Francis.

I suppose the club were in Mr G's pocket (My opinion...Donnington Hall meetings etc)

Rather like UK Chief medical officer being in the pocket of a different Mr G...$40 million USD)

Money talks...

Permalink

Neil also enjoys a good conspiracy theory, but I don't think many of us here want to discuss vaccines, nor argue about the difference between spys (who work for other countrys' interests) and journalists (who work for money regardless of the consequences).

Slander is also a serious business and the Club cannot allow slanderous accusations to be published. We do not have the resources of the Newspapers to defend ourselves in the event of action being taken against us.

I miss Anna's contributions but they did tend to go wildly off topic and were sometimes not in the best interests of the club (who did not wish to be seen to slander a business) nor members who had parted with significant sums of money for a product which appears to have provided both pleasure and pain. And we always heard far more about the pain than the pleasure.

Permalink

I believe that when one signed a contract to buy a Garner Norton, it was necessary to show BUPA membership and agree to a surgical sense of humour removal. Sadly, sucking up to the owners of whoever owns the Norton name goes back a long way with the NOC. I was 'privileged' to be a committee member when the then-current chairman was trying to get into  Rozanda Skalbania's knickers. It wasn't a pleasant time.

Permalink

Thanks Richard for another example of what Francis and I were referring to.

As long as we stick to the facts.

'The truth shall set you free'...John: 8 - 32

Get off the postage stamp, David,  awaken your awareness. 

I'm happy to debate, but this is not the platform. The issue here is the cancellation of Anna.

Permalink

To be honest, Neil, I don't know what your point is or to what you've been referring. The rambling-on lost me long ago.

Permalink

What she lacked in Communication skills, she more than made up for with her knowledge of all things Norton. Something many members are denied at this moment.

Permalink

Anna rang me to inform that she has been able to monitor this Forum but not contribute to the various threads. She is very touched by the support that most people have expressed in their postings and thanks everyone for this. 

She could not say when she will be given back (if ever) her full membership privileges and once again be  allowed to provide answers to Norton related questions. A point raised in may of the above postings.

I opened my Roadholder 408 today and low and behold, there inside was a 'nomination' sheet for Directors of the Club 2022. Perhaps it is time that we had a Director of Annarisms.

Permalink

Thanks for passing this on, Phil.    

Permalink

I have had a couple of messages from Anna via Linkedin. She has been following the comments made in this particular thread, and has asked me to pass on her thanks for the members posting in support of her.

As others have pointed out, 'tis the season of goodwill, and I am sure a workaround can be found that would satisfy all parties if that good will is turned into positive action.

Might I suggest that the Committee reach out to her directly and not through the forum, I am sure she would be receptive and respond accordingly. A frank exchange of views can work wonders sometimes.

 

Permalink

... it may be the frank exchanges that led to the situation.

Permalink

Frank???

Merry Christmas play mates!!

J

 

 

Permalink

I for one would like to see Anna back - she likes Nortons and steam locomotives so she can’t be all that bad .  Regarding the poor syntax and grammatical errors often seen in her posts it is claimed by some that she is handicapped by Dyslexia. If this is indeed the case then I believe it is incumbent upon all to make allowances for this . It may not make for the easiest reading but her points were ultimately understood whether one agreed with them or not .   I hope this not seen as a criticism of those responsible for protecting the club from potential litigation - they have a tough job and I applaud their efforts .

Permalink

If I was AJD I would resent some of the references above which relate to a health issue. That info is now on our computers, now stored and is being transmitted. That seems to me  to be a contravention of the Data protection act ( or what it's now entitled) and I would expect the moderators to remove those references. 

At the very least, it's rude and thoughtless about someone who cannot reply.

Terry

East Yorks.

Permalink

A good friend of mine left school unable to read or write, due to dyslexia. He learned as an adult.  He was from a working class family with many siblings and no father.  Now in his 70s, he is a moderately rich man.  A success in many diverse fields...  Being dyslexic is not a bar to being successful in your own path.

I hope that AJD can be welcomed back to membership of the NOC with full access to the Forum.

Paul Standeven

Permalink

I might be wrong on this, but I am pretty sure that she herself has stated on this forum that she is dyslexic.

Doesn't matter on the forum if she is because it's clear enough what she is trying to say.

Where can we march with our "BRING BACK ANNA" placards?

Permalink

I agree. Anna is entitled to express her views. If anything is judged offensive the moderator can block individual posts. And no has to read them. Allow immediately please. 

Permalink

I'm easy either way. As long as the rules of posting are made clear and the consequences of breaking them will result in possible exclusion then let her return. I was hoping she would appear on 'I'm a celebrity' which would have been entertaining. 

As David Cooper points out, a fundamental problem with any forum is the possibility of contributors publishing defamatory statements and the ensuing possibility of actions for libel.

These are notoriously difficult and expensive to defend even when there is no real ground for action (because the defamatory statement is in fact true — often harder to demonstrate than one might suppose — or because it is what is now referred to as "honest comment", a revised version of the old "fair comment" defence). A particular difficulty with the honest comment defence is that it will fail if the words complained of can be shown to be an imputation of fact, not an expression of opinion.

Website publishers have some immunity from liability for third-party statements, but the emphasis is on "some".

There is a useful summary of defamation law here: https://www.blakemorgan.co.uk/a-brief-guide-to-the-tort-of-defamation/.

(An interesting detail of which I was unaware until visiting the link above is that unincorporated associations are ineligible to bring actions for defamation. Now that the NOC is a company limited by guarantee it could, if necessary, sue to protect its corporate reputation.)

Permalink

There are indeed many variations of truth, feel free to look that up.

But if someone does not like the truth or too lazy to look up a true and corroborated statement,  instead challenges that truth and wrongly calls out slander, should that carry more weight than the original truthful statement?

If the actual truth can be challenged (And without debate) then we might as well be wearing muzzles.....

Oh wait a minute!

Anyway, hope Anna can come back soon to wish us all a Happy Christmas.

 

Permalink

You mean if people don,t agree with your warped view of the world they,re considered snowflakes... Your boring off topic rants will hopefully be subject to the same scrutiny as Anna's posts.

"I,m happy to debate but this is not the platform. The issue here is the cancellation of Anna"

Permalink

We're obliged to Julian for pointing out that we could now if we wished sue for defamation... but realistically and unfortunately it's far more likely that we we would be the ones who would get sued!

The club has gone through a long journey with implementing a set of Forum Policies for this forum. It's involved not only hours of discussion but also years of experience in getting the balance right between the freedoms we can offer to our members and protecting the club against legal action from others.

Thankfully, most of our members cause no problems at all but just occasionally, we all have to drop everything , consult the rules, try and reach a consensus for a particular course of action because one member has decided to ignore our rules and write defamatory statements on the Forum.

May I suggest two things - firstly that not one of us wanted to be put in the position of restricting Anna's membership - but we all felt she had given us zero choice? And secondly, to change the club's decision would .not only put us straight back to the position we were placed in before , but also signal that our Forum Policy isn't worthy of member's support.

What if Anna gave an undertaking to abide by the NOC's Forum Policy you ask? Ah well - you see she did that before...

Peter

 

 

Norton Owners Club Website by White-Hot Design

Privacy Policy