Reopen a thread.

gunny558

Sorry for the wall of text.

I posted a thread on the legal board asking how does a person know if a solicitor is good. Maybe there is some kind of gold standard that solicitors can achieve for recognition of good work, or some kinda cert of quality or something or even maybe a set of questions to ask a potential solicitor or whatever... I dont know... I just want to know how do you tell the good ones from the bad ones.

I came back later and my thread was closed by Hullaballoo and he told me its a charter breach and go read the charter.

So I had a look through the charter and didnt see anything obvious there.

For convenience sake:

1) No legal advice
2) No contempt of court
3) No flaming or trolling
4) No defamatory posts
5) No bigoted, racist, sexist etc posts
6) No spam/advertisements
7) No inappropiate material
8) No advocating illegal or criminal activity
9) No threats of legal action
10) No backseat modding

I pm'd him and told him there is in fact no violations of the charter and could he pin point which of the charter rules he seems to think I have broken.

He replied back saying that he wasnt happy with me pm'ing him late at night because it woke him up (guessing he probably had work the next day) and its not civil and as way of "returning the favour" hes not going to tell me what rule I broke and that I should look at the charter a second time and he told me not to pm him again.

So Im guessing pm'ing him again would be harrassment.... so asking here is the next logical step(?).

Basically Im looking at those 10 rules now and Im really failing to see which one says "no questions allowed on what makes a good solicitor". So is there any way we can side-step this guy and just re-open the thread?

gunny558

BTW: This is the thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057298112

Spear

Moved since this isn't DRP related.

LoLth

I think the forum charter rule that was violated was:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87523048&postcount=7

its a clarification of the list of 10 donts you quoted above.

maybe talk to Hullabaloo by PM, during daylight hours and from a non-combative position to discuss how you can post a thread requesting information on how to identify if a solicitor is good or not without it coming across as asking for or encouraging solicitor recommendations. (which , whether you intended it or not, is what your thread instantly became "I got this solicitor and I recommend him...." etc).

As for PMing at night because it wakes someone up.... Mod should put their phone on silent or not have boards.ie PMs alert after a certain hour imho. I switch my phone to vibrate only so the only alerts I hear are my alarm in the morning but if I 'm already awake I hear the phone "buzz" and know I've received an email. Can you report the PM please so the admins can take a look. The content you describe is very out of character for that mod, he/she/it's usually a lot more accommodating and helpful than that.

gunny558

LoLth wrote: »

I think the forum charter rule that was violated was:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=87523048&postcount=7

its a clarification of the list of 10 donts you quoted above.

maybe talk to Hullabaloo by PM, during daylight hours and from a non-combative position to discuss how you can post a thread requesting information on how to identify if a solicitor is good or not without it coming across as asking for or encouraging solicitor recommendations. (which , whether you intended it or not, is what your thread instantly became "I got this solicitor and I recommend him...." etc).

As for PMing at night because it wakes someone up.... Mod should put their phone on silent or not have boards.ie PMs alert after a certain hour imho. I switch my phone to vibrate only so the only alerts I hear are my alarm in the morning but if I 'm already awake I hear the phone "buzz" and know I've received an email. Can you report the PM please so the admins can take a look. The content you describe is very out of character for that mod, he/she/it's usually a lot more accommodating and helpful than that.

Ok thanks for the advice. I think you already know this, but I just want to clarify incase there is any confusion anywhere along the lines... I am NOT.. looking for a personal recommendation on a solicitor. Im looking for practical advice on how to tell a good one from a bad one.

Also I dont want to "report" hullaballoo or make any complaints against him. If you want I will pm you the messages.. but I dont want you (or anyone else) to think Im posting here to complain about him. The reason I posted here is because he told me not to PM him back... so that kinda limited my options. You were the only other person that could lift the lock on my thread. Posting here was a means to get my thread back..... not a "hey I dont like this mod I want to make a complaint". If that makes sense?

LoLth

Hey Gunny558 ,

I read that PM and yes, Hullaballoo was a bit less-than-helpful but, to be fair, your initial PM was a bit less-than-friendly and more wtf-unlock-thread-now

had I received that at 2am I wouldn't have been very accommodating either.

I would suggest you PM Hullaballoo again and request his/her assistance in posting your question in a way that is acceptable. Its a good question to be honest but I can definitely see where it's gonna need mod care and attention if its not going ot turn into a "I recommend X not Y because Y got my bruvver's sister's cousin's dog thrown in jail because they didn't point out in the defense that it was my bruvver's sister's cousin's cat that bought the petrol and the lighter in the first place and poor Rover didn't even want to be hot in the first place....." or even more informative "not Z, they're ****".

gunny558

I know I was confrontational demanding he pin point the rule I broke but in fairness to myself I didnt know my message was going to wake him up. If I had have known that I would have waited until the following day to send it. I just kinda assumed everyone kept their phones on silent at night. Thats why I was so adamant that I didnt want to "report" him... as you said yourself, if someone sends you a message at 2am of course your gonna be snarly with them. So kinda my own fault. But anyway. Im not here to argue about that I just want to get the thread back up and going. So thanks for the help. I'll pm him tomorrow (when hes not in bed) and see what he has to say. BTW: If if get banned for pm'ing a mod after he tells me not to Im blaming you :P

hullaballoo

Hi, I only spotted this last night.

Hands up, I should have read the detail of the post rather than presume that it was a flat out request for a solicitor recommendation. I may have left it open with a stern warning pointing to the rule against recommending solicitors but, in all honesty, I might have decided the risk that someone would break the rule notwithstanding the warning would be too high and closed it anyway. In fact, the second reply (now deleted) named a solicitor as a recommendation.

There is also a slight issue in that forum that many regulars are legal professionals (or say they are). As such, the objectivity of some recommendations might be skewed as a result of the relative anonymity of these users.

As for the PM exchange, neither of us cover ourselves in glory there. I can understand that people might assume mods don't get interrupted by PM notifications but I do and I cannot turn my phone to silent at night for my own reasons. Maybe if I was more organised, I'd have my email notifications turned off during the night.

Anyway, I apologise for being abrasive in my PM, I would ordinarily at a minimum point you in the direction of the rule at which point of course, you could argue you didn't break it.

Finally, I don't have a problem with you re-starting a thread along the same lines but I'd also point out that you probably won't do much better than the reply you did get from Bepolite - meet a solicitor, use your gut.

P.S. The rule against recommending a solicitor has been controversial in the past and there are mixed views even amongst the mods as to whether it ought to stand. My own view is that all too often, what start out as recommendation threads end up being as LoLth describes - don't use X, she's rubbish, use Y... No, Y is a lunatic, use Z. Frankly, the relationship is like the one you have with a doctor, it boils down to personal preference. There are bulldogs who are effective and there are gentle folk who are just as effective. As for the point that there are idiots in all professions, I don't dispute that but there are checks and balances in the "consumer's" favour to ensure that where someone makes a hames of your case, you'll have a comeback.

gunny558

hullaballoo wrote: »

Anyway, I apologise for being abrasive in my PM, I would ordinarily at a minimum point you in the direction of the rule at which point of course, you could argue you didn't break it.

No need for apologies. As I said, I'd be snarly myself if someone woke me up that late over something silly. Im not sure if this is the best place to discuss this, (but seeing as we are here now) Im going to take a guess based on your reply that there is no such thing as... how would you say... a gold standard.... or recognition of good work... in the solicitor world? If thats the case then it would make the thread redundant and no point going past here- (although, it might be an interesting discussion in its own right. i.e. Would there be a market for something like a gold standard so the average lay person (like myself) can quickly see which solicitors are doing their job because they love it and are passionate about it.... and which ones are just ticking by because its what they are qualified in and it puts food on the table.)