CEO - Shane Richardson

Suzie-Q said:
What you type when you are angry, overtired, and waiting at work for 3 hours, before another 3 hours of unpaid work, then a 40 min drive home ... It's a TYPO. I apologise! HBG. As in #HBGOUT
Click to expand...
Sorry I thought it was some new thing I've never heard of...yes it's shameful that he uses the same account to promote HBG stuff...anyone here would be punted from their company if they did that.
 
weststigers said:
Sorry I thought it was some new thing I've never heard of...yes it's shameful that he uses the same account to promote HBG stuff...anyone here would be punted from their company if they did that.
Click to expand...
Exactly that! None of us could have OF stuff on our social media with links to our places of work and not get rapped over the knuckles.
 
weststigers said:
Classic gas lighter...you're a wrongun
Click to expand...
Sorry, I just didn’t know what else to say to that word salad. I seem to have given you the impression that I support him doing that or that I condone it. I don’t. But at the same time, I don’t see it as something to make a federal case out of. It also seems to be a slippery slope that has had a few flirting with slanderous comments. Which would be bad for forums like this as they have been shut down in the past. If you have an issue, go nuts. I’m not going to argue about moral standards, cos i know there are things that I think are immoral that others couldn’t give a toss about, that’s life. I just think what is said though needs to be said with caution to avoid any fallback on the platforms the comments are made on.
 
GNR4LIFE said:
Sorry, I just didn’t know what else to say to that word salad. I seem to have given you the impression that I support him doing that or that I condone it. I don’t. But at the same time, I don’t see it as something to make a federal case out of. It also seems to be a slippery slope that has had a few flirting with slanderous comments. Which would be bad for forums like this as they have been shut down in the past. If you have an issue, go nuts. I’m not going to argue about moral standards, cos i know there are things that I think are immoral that others couldn’t give a toss about, that’s life. I just think what is said though needs to be said with caution to avoid any fallback on the platforms the comments are made on.
Click to expand...
You brought "slander" into this while quoting what others said on a totally different platform. No one said anything untrue about the guy here and I certainly didn't either.

The point I made was clear and you tried to be the clever contrarian, but there are multiple examples of people being punted for far less in positions of power.

Rome's burning and you decide to make a nuanced point about some blokes Facebook post that nobody here even read or mentioned.

Anyway, whatever...I've had my say.
 
weststigers said:
You brought "slander" into this while quoting what others said on a totally different platform. No one said anything untrue about the guy here and I certainly didn't either.
Click to expand...
Well, someone did call him a rock spider in the other thread. Not sure how “true” that is. Not something you can exactly go around labelling others as.
weststigers said:
Rome's burning and you decide to make a nuanced point about some blokes Facebook post that nobody here even read or mentioned.
Click to expand...
I’m asking people not to get carried away to the point it could put the forum in jeopardy.
 
weststigers said:
Crazy the protection racket going on around this.
Click to expand...
Not really though.

Only Fans & Instagram are not 'illegal'.

What you're trying to do is shame someone. Because they don't follow the same code of ethics as you do.

Unless he's waving pictures of naked women in your face or around the office, he should be free to look at whatever he likes.

If YOU choose to go onto his social media to find who & what he follows (which you need to actually look for- it's not blaring in your face if you go onto someone's Instagram) then that is a choice YOU made.

Unless, along with his #Richoout! posts he's attaching photos of young women in various suggestive West's Sloths football gear, I'd say it's probably closer to 'invasion of privacy' than it is to 'public nuisance'...
 
The Chad said:
Not really though.

Only Fans & Instagram are not 'illegal'.

What you're trying to do is shame someone. Because they don't follow the same code of ethics as you do.

Unless he's waving pictures of naked women in your face or around the office, he should be free to look at whatever he likes.

If YOU choose to go onto his social media to find who & what he follows (which you need to actually look for- it's not blaring in your face if you go onto someone's Instagram) then that is a choice YOU made.

Unless, along with his #Richoout! posts he's attaching photos of young women in various suggestive West's Sloths football gear, I'd say it's probably closer to 'invasion of privacy' than it is to 'public nuisance'...
Click to expand...
This won't age well for you
 
weststigers said:
Fair...Just report the offending post.
Click to expand...
YES! If you see a post that we need to moderate (edit, delete, warn, suspend, ban) PLEASE hit the report button. Too easy. We get the actual post sent to us and we can deal with it. No trolling back through pages of posts to try and find the right one! And if someone is irritating you to tears, hit the ignore button, and you don't have to see any more of their gibberish!

Report and Ignore are your friends <3
 
The Chad said:
Why? Because I'm not actively shaming someone?

Go Sloths!
Click to expand...
I am not “shaming” anyone for what they look at in private. OnlyFans and Instagram are not illegal, and nobody here has suggested they are. Reducing it to that misses the entire point.

This is not about morality. It is about professional standards, public perception, and basic judgment for someone who holds two very public leadership roles:
Chairman of Holman Barnes and
board member of Wests Tigers.

When you choose to follow 200+ OnlyFans creators on a public, business-adjacent account, that is not private behaviour. That is a conscious public facing action attached to the name and reputation of the organisation you represent.

Leaders do not get to shrug off optics. Their choices directly affect the credibility of the brand they sit over.

Nobody went digging through his personal life. These accounts are public. If an executive voluntarily puts something in the shopfront window, they can't blame people for noticing the display.

A club that wants to be taken seriously, commercially, professionally, and culturally, does not need a board member whose digital footprint reads like his. It is not about policing his hobbies. It is about the judgment of someone who is supposed to set standards for a multi-million dollar organisation.

If any other employee did this publicly, he would be hauled into a PR meeting within 48 hours. Why should the board, the people responsible for the governance and culture, hold themselves to a lower bar?

So no, this is not about ethics or pretending OnlyFans is immoral. It is about whether someone in a high-level governance role understands that their behaviour, even on social media, reflects on the club they claim to steward.

If that is too much to ask of a chairman and board member, then maybe that is part of the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 906 (members: 48, guests: 858)
Back
Top