A new season warning about your postings

[sparkie]

Palace sneerers who run down the club take note !

Make sure you can back up your 'facts' about the albion.

 

[seagullsslimjim]

You mean Ernest and Kellie may not be true !

 

[Tooting Gull]

There is a fine line - but it is also usually a clear line. And the word 'opinion' encompasses so many types of comment.

The sentence 'In my opinion Tony Bloom is the worst chairman Brighton has ever had' is not libellous. It is idiotic, but not libellous because that comes under fair comment.

You'd probably even get away with saying that such and such a transfer policy was crass stupidity/negligent. They wouldn't like it, but really it would be very thin-skinned to kick up over that, and it would never get to court.

But imply in any way a named individual especially, or to a slightly lesser extent the club, is guilty of financial wrongdoing or malpractice, or state as fact something that was untrue about the running of the club that would cause a lot of embarrassment or harm, and you are effectively painting a target on your own back.

I still think a club should be very reluctant to take it all the way, but as has been said I can see a test case happening somewhere because that sends out a message to all fans.

 

[London Irish]

I think the Football League should have more constructive priorities than plotting when they are first going to sue a fan.

 

[London Irish]

I showed the opening post to my girlfriend and asked if she thought she was one of the minority that Bozza was referring to. She looked horrified and said "but I don't even post on there." I told her that I begged to differ and the internet history showed she was. She started crying and saying something about must be some mistake...couldn't make out the rest because of the hacking sobbing noise....while I just stared at her. When she'd calmed down/ran out of breath, I just said "Go and have a think about it. I'm not angry, just think about it." She's been good as gold since.

 

[symyjym]

Could it be avoided if the statement began with "in my opinion"? eg. "In my opinion, businessman x is a corporate liar"

If so, surely it's fine to say just about anything as long as we make it clear that it's just our opinion?

Yep a dislaimer at the end of a comment will be the loophole.

Disclaimer:- This may only be an exagerated flippant off the cuff opinion from myself, it may not be fact, and may not represent the views of any other poster or organisation.

 

[8ace]

Don't really see this is really any different than before

 

[knocky1]

This has hurt me as much as when I found out Santa wasn't real. I always thought NSC was honest, truthful and no bull****. I will be more wary of other posters now. Sorry Charlie, I was lead to believe it was you.

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

Could it be avoided if the statement began with "in my opinion"? eg. "In my opinion, businessman x is a corporate liar"

If so, surely it's fine to say just about anything as long as we make it clear that it's just our opinion?

I'm no lawyer but as far as I am aware saying "in my opinion XYZ is ..... " will NOT avoid you being sued for libel. Any more than adding "allegedly" will.

Maybe a lawyer can confirm this or tell me I'm talking rubbish.

 

[Eeyore]

As much as the moderation of NSC is often questioned, I do feel its success is linked directly to it. Trolls and abusive posters are afforded less scope on here than in other places, and as a result more are finding themselves confident enough to join in.

Strong opinions are not at risk here, it would be a sad day if they were, but abuse and blind accusation are. Surely there is nothing wrong with that. It facilitates better debate.

If people want to anonymously troll and abuse others, who are often not here to defend themselves, there are many newspaper comment columns that would be glad to accommodate them.

 

[keaton]

Could it be avoided if the statement began with "in my opinion"? eg. "In my opinion, businessman x is a corporate liar"

If so, surely it's fine to say just about anything as long as we make it clear that it's just our opinion?

You would have to prove it was an honestly held opinion if they did take you to court

 

[Justice]

Very true, though entirely irrelevant to this thread as far as I can see?

In a recent meeting of football league clubs? very relevant I would say.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

I'm no lawyer but as far as I am aware saying "in my opinion XYZ is ..... " will NOT avoid you being sued for libel. Any more than adding "allegedly" will.

Maybe a lawyer can confirm this or tell me I'm talking rubbish.

Bit like saying "I can't call you a w@@ker but I can think you are. Therefore I think you're a w@@ker."

 

[Vegas Seagull]

The 'Football League Clubs' would have spent their time better inviting BT to bid for the TV rights rather than signing a extension with Sky to 2018 just as BT had started throwing huge amounts at the game

 

[Tooting Gull]

I may have inadvertently called a Gillingham defender a midget in another thread. At the risk of starting an Office-stylee dwarf/elf/goblin/pixie debate, this might have been libellous and I apologise (tiny 2-line apology on Page 17).

 

[glasfryn]

this sort of thing always brings to mind the manager of a large club having an row with a referee and say "hey ref can you book me for what I think" ref says "no of coarse not"
manager then says " in that case I think you are a ****"

Bit like saying "I can't call you a w@@ker but I can think you are. Therefore I think you're a w@@ker."

sort of already been said

and I'm sure will be again

 

[GT49er]

If there are genuinely libellous and defamatory comments about individuals at the club on here that are untrue and would damage their reputation if left unchallenged, personally I would not have a problem with anyone at the club (or in life generally) defending their reputation. It is the balance to unfettered 'free speech'.

However what I am more worried about is the club ringing up Bozza, waving the 'legal action' flag and getting just merely awkward/embarrassing/critical stuff taken down which does not legally need to be taken down. And I just hope that when these grey area flashpoints happen - and I'm sure it has/does/will - Bozza can hold the line. It is only a good working relationship if they respect what you're doing as well.

This is all fair comment. Do you not feel that this is the case though?

As far as I know we've never removed anything simply for being awkward, embarrassing or simply critical. If we did there would be nothing letf at the momnet. There are times where maybe we have maybe erred on the side of caution, over things like the Jury's Inn court case, but we'd make no apology for that.

Totally agree with Tooting Gull's comments, and with Hans Kraay's reply. I do not know of any over-zealous censorship having taken place before - and I hope it never will happen. I just hope that if there is ever any.....ermmm, awkwardness, shall we say........in the future, that Tooting Gull's view, which is endorsed by me - and I would guess by many other NSCers too - is taken into consideration (as far as possible, anyway - I do appreciate that it would be Bozza's head on the line, not mine!)

 

[dougdeep]

I see Hans is creeping to the boss again.

 

[DNB_Seagull]

Is this about Barber?

 

[Luke93]

What about putting a smilie at the end of a negative post? That makes everything ****ing better, right?