mate I think you're a good poster and I respect your opinions but there really is no need to go to the club about the forum. It has nothing to do with them just like all the circle jerk Facebook groups out there.
Not sure that's entirely true.
I usually stay out of these debates as they get pretty heated, but because this is (even though independent) a Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks based website, I'm pretty sure the club can get involved if they feel what's being posted can damage the image of the club/brand.
Time for a straw man argument! (everyone's favourite
) Say if everyone on this forum started abusing homosexuals and posted things such as "gay's aren't allowed to support the club" ect, to my understanding the clubs allowed to step in and contact the administrator and tell them to either stop the abuse or take the website down.
Now I am in no way saying Fitz has said anything along those lines, in fact regardless of what he thinks of me, I have massive respect for Fitz. Sure I do think he's guilty of the pot calling the kettle black from time to time with 'no being a jerk' rule, but he works hard to keep this site up and running so he's alright by me.
Now back to the 'Sharks can't get involved' thing. A debate about Internet/forum laws came up one day in class back when I was in year 12 and I remember reading online the laws about slander/damaging a person/entity's image. I'll look it up, just a sec.
A couple quotes from the efa website:
What is a defamatory publication?
The definition of "defamatory matter" varies among Australian jurisdictions. In some jurisdictions common law definitions apply, while in others (e.g. Queensland and Tasmania) the definition has been codified.
Very generally speaking, material that could be found to be defamatory includes that which has the tendency to lower the person in the estimation of others, or that would tend to result in the person being shunned or avoided or that is likely to expose the person to hatred, contempt or ridicule (trivial ridicule or good natured humour is less likely to be problematic than derisory ridicule).
Who can sue?
In theory, any individual or entity who considers damage to their reputation has or is likely to occur, as a result of material published, may sue the publisher/s of the material.
In practice, the laws are inaccessible to ordinary individuals who are defamed due to the exhorbitant legal costs involved in bringing a defamation action.
Australia's defamation laws are often used by politicians and corporations who consider the media, individuals or community groups have defamed them in publishing information critical of their activities.
https://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/defamation.html
Now I'm a simple man (barley passed year 12 lol) but to me that sounds like the Sharks can get involved if they think the members of this forum are damaging the brand. As I said, simple man, if anyone that knows a bit about law could clear it up that'd be great and would be info worth knowing IMO.