Has anyone seen the new site? Compared to the last version they had this one takes the cake. 5 STARS out of 5. Good work guys.




http://www.ambitious-outsiders.com/topbanner.jpg

> Has anyone seen the new site? Compared to the last version they had this
> one takes the cake. 5 STARS out of 5.

Nope and i am not planning two.

> Nope and i am not planning two.

how about three then?

The site looks good, but I have one complaint, on the main page, it says: "any reproductions of illustrations or photographs appearing on these pages is strictly prohibited." Did you notice that the day after the Vic Seipke photo was posted on m-solo, it ended up in ao's journal's page? Do as I say, and not as I do?

Do ao think that they own the photos of Morrissey?

The site launched the week of m-solo's not so great update. Coincidence?

> The site looks good, but I have one complaint, on the main page, it says:
> "any reproductions of illustrations or photographs appearing on these
> pages is strictly prohibited." Did you notice that the day after the
> Vic Seipke photo was posted on m-solo, it ended up in ao's journal's page?
> Do as I say, and not as I do?

> Do ao think that they own the photos of Morrissey?

I DOUBT IT. THAT'S ODD THEY HAVE THAT DISCLAIMER... THEY STEAL EVERYTHING ELSE AND THEN TRY TO SELL IT AS THEIR OWN. HAS ANYONE CALLED LA MIGRA ON THESE HOOLIGANS?

this has already been discussed ad nauseum on this board. basically, since they do not claim to be affiliated with morrissey, they can claim to be the official online fanzine. there are no legal ramifications. some may question the ethics of chris and truthful liar's choice to use the word "official," but it is their right. and truth be told, it really is one of the only morrissey sites that can be called a fanzine (when it's in its full glory with fan profiles, news tidbits and downloads). moz-solo, while a fantastic morrissey website, doesn't realy qualify as a fanzine, but i don't think that was david's intention anyway.

> this has already been discussed ad nauseum on this board. basically, since
> they do not claim to be affiliated with morrissey, they can claim to be
> the official online fanzine. there are no legal ramifications. some may
> question the ethics of chris and truthful liar's choice to use the word
> "official," but it is their right. and truth be told, it really
> is one of the only morrissey sites that can be called a fanzine (when it's
> in its full glory with fan profiles, news tidbits and downloads).
> moz-solo, while a fantastic morrissey website, doesn't realy qualify as a
> fanzine, but i don't think that was david's intention anyway.

Whether it's their right or not is irrelevant. The point is, it's tacky as hell. Unless Morrissey has a hand in it, it's not "official" as far as I'm concerned.

On another note, I hope that with the launch of chris' newly revamped website, that we aren't going to see him reappear here, creating turmoil like he did last time with all his f'ing drama. Hopefully that boy found his way to Prozac before round 2.

> Whether it's their right or not is irrelevant. The point is, it's tacky as
> hell. Unless Morrissey has a hand in it, it's not "official" as
> far as I'm concerned.

it's not tacky, really, at least not in my opinion. and wouldn't it be weird and narcissistic if morrissey had a hand in a fanzine in honor of him?

> On another note, I hope that with the launch of chris' newly revamped
> website, that we aren't going to see him reappear here, creating turmoil
> like he did last time with all his f'ing drama. Hopefully that boy found
> his way to Prozac before round 2.

i know chris. we IM from time to time. he's a really nice guy and i don't understand why people give him a hard time. (maybe the same reason they give me a hard time?) anyway, he's a good guy and i think AO is a fab site. if you want to bitch about people creating turmoil, i think you chose the wrong person to bitch about. at least chris doesn't flame people or post generally post nasty things for no reason. there are lots worse people on this board.

> it's not tacky, really, at least not in my opinion. and wouldn't it be
> weird and narcissistic if morrissey had a hand in a fanzine in honor of
> him?

> i know chris. we IM from time to time. he's a really nice guy and i don't
> understand why people give him a hard time. (maybe the same reason they
> give me a hard time?) anyway, he's a good guy and i think AO is a fab
> site. if you want to bitch about people creating turmoil, i think you
> chose the wrong person to bitch about. at least chris doesn't flame people
> or post generally post nasty things for no reason. there are lots worse
> people on this board.

I don't know Chris personally, so I can't say one way or the other. All I can go off of is past experience and I remember plenty of drama that he drug over to this message board. He may not have started all of it, but to carry it on here while running another site was irresponsible and left a bad taste in my mouth.

Hopefully he's learned from past mistakes.

His new format is visually appealing, and I commend him for that. I love that (very recent?) pic of Morrissey on the main page. If Chris plays his cards right, he could have success. Only time will tell.

> I don't know Chris personally, so I can't say one way or the other. All I
> can go off of is past experience and I remember plenty of drama that he
> drug over to this message board. He may not have started all of it, but to
> carry it on here while running another site was irresponsible and left a
> bad taste in my mouth.

> Hopefully he's learned from past mistakes.

i wasn't here for all the drama, but i seriously doubt he started it. in any case, i know he visited this site before AO was up and running. there's no law that says you can't visit one site's messageboard if you have your own. i don't really see moz-solo and AO as being competing websites in any way. they're both about morrissey, but there's room for both.

> His new format is visually appealing, and I commend him for that. I love
> that (very recent?) pic of Morrissey on the main page. If Chris plays his
> cards right, he could have success. Only time will tell.

i'm very glad that you were able to look beyond your dislike for chris to give credit where credit is due. it shows that you are very reasonable.

> i wasn't here for all the drama, but i seriously doubt he started it. in
> any case, i know he visited this site before AO was up and running.
> there's no law that says you can't visit one site's messageboard if you
> have your own. i don't really see moz-solo and AO as being competing
> websites in any way. they're both about morrissey, but there's room for
> both.

Chris' new disclaimer about not being able to copy anything off of his website - that made me laugh. Back during the "drama", he would frequently copy posts off of this messageboard and paste them into his journal on his webpage followed by his thoughts. He was notorious for cut&paste from this website to his own, but hey, that was in the past, right.

> i'm very glad that you were able to look beyond your dislike for chris to
> give credit where credit is due. it shows that you are very reasonable.

Yes, I am reasonable. We're all changing and hopefully growing everyday. I can't knock the kid for his efforts, he's definitely got some talent there.

> Chris' new disclaimer about not being able to copy anything off of his
> website - that made me laugh. Back during the "drama", he would
> frequently copy posts off of this messageboard and paste them into his
> journal on his webpage followed by his thoughts. He was notorious for
> cut&paste from this website to his own, but hey, that was in the past,
> right.

well i saw the disclaimer and i admit that seemed odd. i am pretty sure it refers mainly to the artwork (i.e. not so much the photos themselves as their unique presentation of them). i do know about the posts thing. he posted something about one of my posts once and that's how it came to pass that we started chatting on occasion. that seems pretty innocent though -- copying posts off messageboards i mean.

> Yes, I am reasonable. We're all changing and hopefully growing everyday. I
> can't knock the kid for his efforts, he's definitely got some talent
> there.

They did the right thing, and updated the whole disclaimer.

> The site looks good, but I have one complaint, on the main page, it says:
> "any reproductions of illustrations or photographs appearing on these
> pages is strictly prohibited." Did you notice that the day after the
> Vic Seipke photo was posted on m-solo, it ended up in ao's journal's page?
> Do as I say, and not as I do?

> Do ao think that they own the photos of Morrissey?

> The site launched the week of m-solo's not so great update. Coincidence?