Mods pulling posts knocking the Khans

[sunburywhite]

No doubt this will disappear in about half an hour but as already been flagged anything that is deemed in the slightest way offensive to the Khans is being deleted

Part of the beauty of the board has been how we all have a moan about the players/manager/owners but do remain some kind of civility

If we are now going to enter some kind of North Korean mother state whereby there is no critisim of those higher up then I am afriad the board is no longer for me

[hovewhite]

Likewise free speech in a polite tone ,what next mods becoming mouthpiece for the owners.
This is a board for polite opinions you Mods

[Friendsoffulham]

Fire away..

When we are approached about defamatory coments again, and threatend with legal action, we'll just give up all the details of our Members, rather than trying to cover for them, and take it on the chin as a Forum.

[bobbo]

Fire away..

When we are approached about defamatory coments again, and threatend with legal action, we'll just give up all the details of our Members, rather than trying to cover for them, and take it on the chin as a Forum.

i'm not involved in this and have never slagged off the khans or any other owner .BUT friends of Fulham mod beware of what you threaten there is a data protection act in place.
However I don't see any value in grinding tony Khan to the extent he has been.

[toshes mate]

I can quite understand any defamatory material being removed.  I am aware of what, for example, happened to posts concerning a character who was removed from Motspur Park which was a fair way to protect all concerned.  Defamation is a serious matter since it steps well outside the arena of opinion, and I am not surprised if questionable posts are pulled well before damage can be done to anyone including the poster and the object of the defamation.  I would also hope and believe our moderators are keen for the FOF forum to keep healthy opinion on the Khans and anyone else connected with FFC lively and topical since to do otherwise would be a rapid road to rendering these kinds of boards meaningless and obsolete.  We can all be offended by opinion but it doesn't make it defamatory.

[Burt]

Football forums have not been immune from club owners, or other people associated with the club, or indeed other forum members, taking legal action for defamatory comments made about them.

Forum owners have a duty of care to ensure that nothing on here could pave the way for someone to take libel action against posters making public comments that they allege have impact their reputation and standing.

Just google "Owlstalk Legal Action" and see what happened with this Sheff Wed fans forum. Basically the owner was put under judicial pressure to disclose the identity and contact details of certain posters who made statements against the then-owners of the club, who in turn decided to press charges.

This is why we have our Guidelines for Posting.

And this is why certain posts get removed. It's nothing to do with restricting free speech, or being in the pockets of certain people. It's all to do with protecting certain members from themselves when they make potentially libelous comments, and putting FOF in a position where we may end up being put under pressure to disclose the identity of posters.

We have no objection to "healthy opinion", but will pull the plug on posts that have unfounded potentially libelous allegations that impact the reputation and standing of others to the extent that they may issue proceedings.

[Oakeshott]

It is certainly neither defamatory nor libellous to opine that TK's appointment is nepotism in action - his relationship with the owner and his complete lack of relevant prior experience or achievement establish a compelling case.

And it is surely within the range of legitimate comment to offer the opinion that TK has proved inadequate in role and would be most unlikely to get a comparable position with any other Premiership or Championship club.

[Penfold]

Fire away..

When we are approached about defamatory coments again, and threatend with legal action, we'll just give up all the details of our Members, rather than trying to cover for them, and take it on the chin as a Forum.

What is regarded as defamatory? Surely saying 'I don't believe Tony Khan should be director of football at Fulham FC' is?

If this upsets the club then they really have lost touch.

[Jims Dentist]

I see that fof are trying to look out for posters and thank them for that.

However, if TK & Co can't take the critisism/observations of the way they are "running things"  then if they/he can't take the heat then perhaps it's time to vacate the kitchen.

[hovewhite]

I see that fof are trying to look out for posters and thank them for that.

However, if TK & Co can't take the critisism/observations of the way they are "running things"  then if they/he can't take the heat then perhaps it's time to vacate the kitchen.

and if they can't accept criticism they should sell the club.

[hovewhite]

I see that fof are trying to look out for posters and thank them for that.

However, if TK & Co can't take the critisism/observations of the way they are "running things"  then if they/he can't take the heat then perhaps it's time to vacate the kitchen.

and if they can't accept criticism they should sell the club.

they must read this site,for them to pressure the mods.

[Penfold]

I see that fof are trying to look out for posters and thank them for that.

However, if TK & Co can't take the critisism/observations of the way they are "running things"  then if they/he can't take the heat then perhaps it's time to vacate the kitchen.

and if they can't accept criticism they should sell the club.

Agreed. Have no idea why Shad bought Fulham

[hovewhite]

I see that fof are trying to look out for posters and thank them for that.

However, if TK & Co can't take the critisism/observations of the way they are "running things"  then if they/he can't take the heat then perhaps it's time to vacate the kitchen.

and if they can't accept criticism they should sell the club.

Agreed. Have no idea why Shad bought Fulham

no idea why,but I don't think I remember being so negative about any of  the owners of our lovely club.

[Nick Bateman]

One does not see the logic in being negative towards the Khans.  They have shown they will invest at least £100million in Fulham F.C.  It was not about their backing but the quality of player they acquired.  That would suggest a lack of experience and relying on our scouts who referred them to the individuals we acquired.

So if one is to criticize then perhaps one should single out the judgement of Fulham's scouts who recommended these sub-standard over-priced players, not the lack of financial support the Khans gave Fulham.

They bought Mitrovic for £25million which was paramount!

[Barrett487]

Football forums have not been immune from club owners, or other people associated with the club, or indeed other forum members, taking legal action for defamatory comments made about them.

Forum owners have a duty of care to ensure that nothing on here could pave the way for someone to take libel action against posters making public comments that they allege have impact their reputation and standing.

Just google "Owlstalk Legal Action" and see what happened with this Sheff Wed fans forum. Basically the owner was put under judicial pressure to disclose the identity and contact details of certain posters who made statements against the then-owners of the club, who in turn decided to press charges.

This is why we have our Guidelines for Posting.

And this is why certain posts get removed. It's nothing to do with restricting free speech, or being in the pockets of certain people. It's all to do with protecting certain members from themselves when they make potentially libelous comments, and putting FOF in a position where we may end up being put under pressure to disclose the identity of posters.

We have no objection to "healthy opinion", but will pull the plug on posts that have unfounded potentially libelous allegations that impact the reputation and standing of others to the extent that they may issue proceedings.

:plus one:

I respect this stance and believe in the integrity of our mods. I also believe, however, that posters should be allowed to voice their opinions. The answer is almost certainly that posters should reread their posts before they post and assess whether their comments are libel-fodder. There's always ways of wording grievances that cover your 4rse. Direct accusations are pretty much an open invitation for legal action.

[Barrett487]

One does not see the logic in being negative towards the Khans.  They have shown they will invest at least £100million in Fulham F.C.  It was not about their backing but the quality of player they acquired.  That would suggest a lack of experience and relying on our scouts who referred them to the individuals we acquired.

So if one is to criticize then perhaps one should single out the judgement of Fulham's scouts who recommended these sub-standard over-priced players, not the lack of financial support the Khans gave Fulham.

They bought Mitrovic for £25million which was paramount!

True Nick, but that's not the point.

[terryr]

 Anti Khan posts have become repetitive and boring.
'We hate you for spending £100 million"
The constant search for a scapegoat always seem to ignore the players on the field making £50k a week.
It's the khans fault that the players seem to play only when it suits them.
Yes, the khans are to blame and saint Slav or whoever other non player you worship have nothing to do with it.
Let's move on

[Arthur]

I suppose those who are aggrieved at the removal of their posts can always back their own confidence that their views are not libellous and send the very same words directly to the Club along with their name and address.

[RaySmith]

One does not see the logic in being negative towards the Khans.  They have shown they will invest at least £100million in Fulham F.C.  It was not about their backing but the quality of player they acquired.  That would suggest a lack of experience and relying on our scouts who referred them to the individuals we acquired.

So if one is to criticize then perhaps one should single out the judgement of Fulham's scouts who recommended these sub-standard over-priced players, not the lack of financial support the Khans gave Fulham.

They bought Mitrovic for £25million which was paramount!

0001.jpeg

The Khans may have made mistakes, mainly, perhaps, in failing to surround themselves with people experienced in running a Prem club but they are to be aplauded in investing heavily in the club - and for getting us back into the Prem, and that glorious day at Wembley.

Such a shame that crucial errors have meant our Prem tenure has been a failure this time. I'm sure the Khans are  mortified by this, just as we are.

[SuffolkWhite]

I agree with Ray Smith. I also think people should voice oppinions but clearly in a way that does not mean getting sued. I believe the Mods are looking out for us. Personally I have no major problem with the Khans owning the club. Yes I am concerned with the on field results and how that has come about and yes I am concerned with how much tickets will be next season, but its the use of language thats used to express that the mods are concerned about I'm sure. My two pennies anyway.