I was right a posting by Rachel was put on Stewarts thread and removed, they are all saying it was personal message.
For starters i didnt know you could do that, i certainly am not on any mailing list so presume i am not in the "click"
Talk about ganging up on me!!
I am Prima Donna!!!!

Hi Prima Donna

What was the gist of the message that you read and was subsequently removed? You seemed to suggest that it was something derogatory about Stewart's posting and that is being hotly denied!! They all seem to be circling for the kill

For what it is worth, I also saw the post from Suzanne yesterday, and had a wry smile to myself when she made the announcement that Steve was "supporting the Bay City Rollers" in Whitehaven (but let's leave that topic alone for a while shall we?). She included a link to a press cutting from, I think, the Whitehaven local paper. Rebelfreak1 (Jimbo) replied and the post was removed the next time I looked. There was nothing malicious at all in her post, nothing offensive or nasty- but it was removed relatively quickly.

I hadn't seen all the Prima Donna/Stewart G fuss until just now.

Can I just confirm that Rachels posting was addressed to me in a private way,asking for me to get in touch in a VERY NICE WAY.which i did privately via email.
There was no malice at all in the posting and certainly no malice in our discussions subsequently.(Far from it).
At no stage was anyone having a go at me for anything ( far from it).

Rachels message to Stewart was something like " thats a bit near the knuckle" it was made late at night and my initial feeling was that Rachel misread stewarts thread?
But hey even though they admit it was on there after denying it at the beginning, i am still wrong?
I also put another message on another thread about songs been covered and shown on the site, i didnt say it was rubbish i just commented that i didnt see the point!
Apparently there's a red indian out to scalp me! too late mate!!!!
I am Prima Donna!!!!!

You are but a novice, sweetcheeks.

What exactly is the point you are trying to make Prima Donna?

That the hypocrisy shown and engineered by the man himself and put into force by a certain couple of people is pathetic.

And what exactly is YOUR point Andy? Maybe that you delete posts on the official site without good reason???

I have no idea about this supposed missing post by Rachel but I would like an explanation as to why the recent posting by dear sweet Suzanne was removed (see above). She certainly did not break any forum rules although I suspect that Rebelfreek "I am number" one did when he slagged her off in his response. However, according to the rules of your forum, only that nasty reply should have been removed and not the original helpful posting about Whitehaven.

Over to you Andy.

I lay ten pounds to a penny that you don't bother to reply, my winnings going to charity.

MAL

I was reading some of the posts about censership on the other board and I sent an email to Andy Fearon to say I was not happy that he had removed my posting although I am not really a steve harley fan. He said it was nothing personal and it was removed because it was factually incorrect. He said Steve is not supporting the Bay City Rollers in Whitehaven because the Bay City Rollers are suporting him. He was very nice when he explained it. Suzanne.

Thank you for that explanation Suzanne. There are often factually incorrect postings on the official site. Instead of removing what you had written why could Rachel or her ilk simply add another posting to explain the error. That is what usually happens. It is censorship, pure and simple. Only sycophantic postings are allowed.

Unbelievable.

The way Steve Harley,Jolly Roger,Essex Boy Billy,Rachel,whoever of those he chooses to be is reacting to anything which does'nt conform to his liking will alienate people,some of whom are already casting doubts about the man's response to the 70's fiasco,After Birmingham he will put on a charm offensive as i believe for a lot of long term fans it will be a Journey's End.

I think Suzanne has provided the explanation, and for the record Rachel did post a response clarifying the error, but it was further decided that since the official announcement of the performance was to appear later the same day, it would be less confusing, and less embarrasing to Suzanne, if we just removed the thread.

No vital information was lost. If a book is re-printed with typos corrected, would you consider that censorship? Or should they be struck through, with the corrections printed next to them so that we have a full and transparent record of all the iterations and corrections?

Honestly, the conspiracy theories about censorship on Steve's site drive me to despair.

Please can you provide details of any other factually incorrect postings concerning the promotion of Steve's performances?

Since the official website is Steve's personal site, created for the purposes of promoting Steve and his music, I really don't understand why it is such an issue to accept that we don't want misleading information appearing on it.

Puddled/piddled, whoever you are, please send your donation to one of Steve's favoured charities - Cancer & Polio Research or the Mines Advisory Group (MAG). I shall match your donation if you can prove that you have made it.

Anne Robinson - I just don't want to feed your delusions. Carry on and good luck.

I think enough is enough now. Thank you Andy for explaining the situation.

Let's all move onwards and upwards! Let's countdown to Birmingham. I for one, can't wait!

What a wuss !!
Shall we be changing your name now to Winston, as in Smith???
I was waiting to read more ......
Is this not the "democratic" site PJH ?

It is a democratic site but the whole 'debate' was getting very tedious to say the least. Hat's off to Prima Donna for making an apology on the official site. Let's draw a line under whatever the whole topic was about and get back to some juicy Cockney Rebel discussion.....how about setlists???!!!

The message to prima donna thread has been removed as per request of the original poster.

"It is censorship, pure and simple. Only sycophantic postings are allowed.

Unbelievable."

How do you feel Peter, about deleting a post from your "democratic site"?

Please don't misunderstand me, as this is not a criticism, I'm reaching out to another webmaster.

Is this censorship, or just reserving the right to have control over the content of YOUR OWN site, whilst maintaining the interests of all involved, in the same way that Steve and his management reserve the same rights?

Hey hey hey hey !!!!

How do I feel Andy?

With respect:

I removed a posting at the request of the person who started a thread, because he felt it was no longer relevant, with Prima Donna having apologised on the official forum.

I would give the same consideration to any poster, who would like a posting he/she has initiated, and is no longer relevant, taken off. Or even a posting that was put up, and later regretted, for whatever reason, as long as it was with that persons agreement. I have done so many times.

Conversely, as an example, Suzanne's posting on the official forum was not removed at the request of the originator prior to the posting being removed.

I do appreciate that running the official site has different implications to that of running an unofficial discussion board, and that Mr Harley and his management reserve the right to run their business as they see fit.

It should be pointed out that any fans who post here are no lesser fans than those who frequent the official forum, and they too have a voice, and possibly a little more freedom to express their views. People here care. Some people, including myself, choose to use both boards.

I for one appreciate your fine work as webmaster on the official site. Thank you for your observations.

In the eight years that I have been running Steve's site I have removed less than ten posts from the site. The vast majority of which have been at the request of the originator - including Rachel's post that has caused so much fuss.

When I do it though, it's called censorship.