Should the title of this forum be changed ?

danash

With the amount of 1/2 reply threads closed by moderators and the majority of multiple response threads relating to discussion about books, barristers and PFOs should this forum change its name to something other than 'Legal Discussion'


There really is very little legal discussion.


Yes - my earlier thread was closed when it asked for experience or comments - not advice.

Red Sleeping Beauty

It's all to do with wording. They way you worded your post read like you were looking for legal advice basically. If you'd left it at this the mods might have let it roll...

danash wrote: »

Was wondering if anyone has experience of the mortgaging bank's role in a Property Adjustment order on marriage breakdown.

Tom Young

Danash, I closed it as you appeared to be seeking something which you could rely on. I note that last poster is correct.

It looked like you were seeking advice.

Tom

Amazotheamazing

There should be a sub-forum for legal trainee questions imo.

danash

Tom Young wrote: »

Danash, I closed it as you appeared to be seeking something which you could rely on. I note that last poster is correct.

It looked like you were seeking advice.

Tom

How could any 'advice' I might have got here impacted my actions in this case? I was looking for peoples experiences in a similar situation.

hullaballoo

Did you start this thread to argue with a moderator's decision or are you trying to ask a valid question? If it's the former, I very strongly suggest you re-read the forum charter and go about it correctly.

I hate veiled Feedback threads.

danash

hullaballoo wrote: »

Did you start this thread to argue with a moderator's decision or are you trying to ask a valid question? If it's the former, I very strongly suggest you re-read the forum charter and go about it correctly.

I hate veiled Feedback threads.

My question in this thread is very clear - should the title of the forum be changed because as far as I can see there is very little legal discusion on the forum.

hullaballoo

There are 2,768 threads and 24,376 posts in this forum. Are you telling me that you've read the whole lot of them and reached the conclusion that there's very little legal discussion on this forum?

How about this: I actually have read the whole lot of them and I've reached a different conclusion. I think there's purposeful and meaningful discussion around the legal aspects of our society every day in this forum.

I would be interested to see people's views on whether or not they think there should be a sub-forum for the discussion of matters relating to students and trainees as distinct from theoretical legal discussion (which I think is what the OP is talking about)? Personally, I don't think that the forum's traffic warrants a sub-forum. If those trainee etc. threads were moved out of the main forum, there would be very little to talk about. I'm struggling to see your point, danash, honestly I am.

Anyone got any legitimate suggestions around this?

danash

The use of internet forums is broad but in general many inexperienced or infrequent users have a question they would like to discuss. The title of the forum suggests they might be succesful here.

I have not read all 24000 posts - and I commend you on your industry - but have been visiting the site recently and I see what I believe to be many interesting questions shut down at birth.

I have no interest in whether a trainee solicitor received a PFO or if there is a TV progamme about Barristers but would like to increase my knowledge by listening to other people's experience.

In my opinion your fear of lawsuits is hampering the proliferation of interesting threads and turning the forum into a law office water cooler.

Hence I think you should change the title.

hullaballoo

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055458679

danash

hullaballoo wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055458679

From that thread -

Let's just say the forum is about the appropriate dissemination of valid information and for the purposes of stimulating healthy debate, inasmuch as we can provide that.




Closing threads does not stimulate healthy debate.

But then again it is your forum.

NUTLEY BOY

danash wrote: »

My question in this thread is very clear - should the title of the forum be changed because as far as I can see there is very little legal discusion on the forum.

There is a fine line between an opinion on a legal topic and a legal opinion on a topic.

Cross to the wrong side of that line in a forum like this and you end up giving legal advice.

Read Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd. -v- Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] A.C. 465 for an idea of what that can follow if negligent or erroneous statements are made upon which people then place reliance..........

By contrast, consider today's judgment of Finlay J in the High Court in relation to a case of several sets of lost deeds. I am waiting for that to be posted on the courts website. We could discuss that until we are unconcious and no potential harm or liability is likely to accrue to anyone

Tom Young

Nutley, was this a High Court Judgment of Ms. Justice Finlay Geoghegan?

2007 5373P ACC BANK PLC V FAIRLEE PROPERTIES LTD & ORS

Is this the Beades judgment?

It may not appear on the site to be frank.

Many don't.

Tom

Victor

hullaballoo wrote: »

Anyone got any legitimate suggestions around this?

How about "legal studies"?

Johnny Utah

danash wrote: »

With the amount of 1/2 reply threads closed by moderators and the majority of multiple response threads relating to discussion about books, barristers and PFOs should this forum change its name to something other than 'Legal Discussion'


There really is very little legal discussion.


Yes - my earlier thread was closed when it asked for experience or comments - not advice.

I haven't seen your thread, but I can only assume that it was closed because you were seeking legal advice.

Posters are not allowed to provide legal advice regarding specific cases. We are, however, allowed to discuss general, theoretical legal issues. For example, it would be permissible to have a general, academic discussion on adverse possession and whether certain aspects of it should be reformed. With that in mind, I think the title of the forum is quite apt.

As for the other threads on books/barristers/PFOs, these are relevant topics for students and practitioners in the legal profession. There are similar topics discussed in the biology and medicine forum, emergency services, etc.

hullaballoo wrote: »

There are 2,768 threads and 24,376 posts in this forum. Are you telling me that you've read the whole lot of them and reached the conclusion that there's very little legal discussion on this forum?

How about this: I actually have read the whole lot of them and I've reached a different conclusion. I think there's purposeful and meaningful discussion around the legal aspects of our society every day in this forum.

I would be interested to see people's views on whether or not they think there should be a sub-forum for the discussion of matters relating to students and trainees as distinct from theoretical legal discussion (which I think is what the OP is talking about)? Personally, I don't think that the forum's traffic warrants a sub-forum. If those trainee etc. threads were moved out of the main forum, there would be very little to talk about. I'm struggling to see your point, danash, honestly I am.

Anyone got any legitimate suggestions around this?

No, I don't think that there should be a sub-forum:

1) As I said above, I think a lot of the issues raised in the trainee/career threads are quite relevant to legal discussion- they provide an insight into the state of the legal profession.
2) If there was a sub-forum, there is the possibility that some posters (practitioners in particular) would not bother viewing or posting on the trainee sub-forum, and likewise perhaps some trainees/students would forget about the main legal discussion forum. This would be a shame as some posters here provide a great input.
3) Judging by recent weeks, the trainee sub-forum would soon become much busier than the main legal discussion forum. As you say yourself, there would be very little left to talk about. This may result in the legal discussion itself becoming somewhat dormant with only a hanful of posters.
4) There are a lot of issues discussed which wouldn't strictly fall into the bracket of either academic theoretical legal discussion or a trainee sub-forum; for instance there have been threads in relation to how to make a complaint about a solicitor, or why is my solicitor taking so long to execute a conveyance- which wouldn't be suited to either forum, strictly speaking.
5) And besides, where would the newly qualifieds/experienced solicitors/barristers post if they wanted to discuss career issues. It would turn into a mess if we had 5/6 sub-forums on legal discussions imo.

So, for those reasons, I don't think it's appropriate to create a sub-forum.

dats_right

This thread is pedantic. The name of the forum is more than adequate.

Maximilian

dats_right wrote: »

This thread is pedantic. The name of the forum is more than adequate.

OP is just another person who is annoyed he can't get free legal advice here, that's all. How many such threads have we had now?

danash

Maximilian wrote: »

OP is just another person who is annoyed he can't get free legal advice here, that's all. How many such threads have we had now?

So now we have the real reason - it's not just Obama that llikes protectionism.....


Go on ....flame me..... ban me......but if it looks like a duck ...etc

Phototoxin

what about making it the crime / criminology forum (see sig) ?

hullaballoo

Now that would be an idea for a sub-forum.

Otherwise, I don't see a problem with the forum as things stand. I don't get bogged down with nomenclature since everything you need to know about the forum is contained in the charter and stickies.

Maximilian

danash wrote: »

So now we have the real reason - it's not just Obama that llikes protectionism.....


Go on ....flame me..... ban me......but if it looks like a duck ...etc

And I suppose if you were sick, you think you should be able to get medical advice on Boards as well, instead of going to a doctor.

danash

Maximilian wrote: »

And I suppose if you were sick, you think you should be able to get medical advice on Boards as well, instead of going to a doctor.

You make my point for me Maximillian - even your reference to the number of threads discussing the same thing might just give you a hint that people expect something slightly different from this forum. I'm not suggesting that you cant support your own trade by not giving free advice I am merely suggesting that the title of the thread gives us mere mortals the impression that there may be a slight possibility of discussion about their issue.

To assume that people would only rely on this forum as their sole source of advice and information is bizarre.

Internet forums are there for a purpose - to discuss things. Your rigid interpretation of 'giving advice' prevents this happening on this board.

Getting PFOs from law firms is not legal discussion - it is an economic matter.

TV shows about Barristers are entertainment - not legal discussion.


My point is simple - you are entitled to your rules - it is your forum - but the title is in my opinion ( and due to the other threads - the opinion of others ) - grossly misleading.


Incidentally I have got excellent advice from Medical Websites - however I have enough personal intelligence to resort to the medical profession whenever I need their skills. I like however to be a little better informed. This site is not doing that ( in my opinion )

hullaballoo

Look, the issue you're having is with the title. What we're saying is, 'that's fine but anything misleading in the title is resolved by the charter and stickies'.

Since it's mandatory that users read the charter before posting means that the issue should never arise. I can tell that you haven't read the charter just because you cannot see the clarity behind the forum's objective.

It's for the discussion of all things relating to law - study, training, employment, research, academics, theory, practise.

Advice is not the same as discussion. Please tell me you know that. Please tell me that when your exam question says, 'Sam signed a contract with a builder for €40,000 for work to be done. The builder completed €10,000 worth of work and then absconded with the remaining €30,000', you could tell the difference between, 'advise Sam' and 'discuss'?

danash

hullaballoo wrote: »

Look, the issue you're having is with the title. What we're saying is, 'that's fine but anything misleading in the title is resolved by the charter and stickies'.

Since it's mandatory that users read the charter before posting means that the issue should never arise. I can tell that you haven't read the charter just because you cannot see the clarity behind the forum's objective.

It's for the discussion of all things relating to law - study, training, employment, research, academics, theory, practise.

Advice is not the same as discussion. Please tell me you know that. Please tell me that when your exam question says, 'Sam signed a contract with a builder for €40,000 for work to be done. The builder completed €10,000 worth of work and then absconded with the remaining €30,000', you could tell the difference between, 'advise Sam' and 'discuss'?

Look, I read the charter. Your tone and condescension in my opinion is sailing close to a breach of that charter.


I started this thread some years ago and received some excellent information.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055011025


I cant see the difference in tone to this thread and the one I started recently - except for the intervention of the Moderator.


The sheer volume of closed threads must indicate to you that people cannot or wont interpret the objectives you laid out.


As far as Sam above is concerned I'm sure you would dicuss the matter with him to increase your knowledge before you would proceed to advise him. That's what I would do - but then again I dont have the benefit of your legal training.

Maximilian

The rules are there for a reason. You don't have to like them, agree with them or even understand why the rules are there and they are not changing. Your antagonistic attitude doesn't do you any favours by the way.

danash

Maximilian wrote: »

The rules are there for a reason. You don't have to like them, agree with them or even understand why the rules are there and they are not changing. Your antagonistic attitude doesn't do you any favours by the way.

Isn't our legal system 'adversarial' ? ( or is that asking for (free) advice? )

Maximilian

danash wrote: »

Isn't our legal system 'adversarial' ? ( or is that asking for (free) advice? )

Yes it is adversarial but it is also respectful, a quality you appear to lack.

danash

Maximilian wrote: »

Yes it is adversarial but it is also respectful, a quality you appear to lack.

Maybe I'll send you on the PM from hullabaloo that formed my opinion.


Just because I don't argue in the same style as you doesn't mean it is less valid.

Phototoxin

what about a criminology forum and legal discussions as a sub section of that. that way it comes under the umbrella term of crime? Of course not all law is criminal related so it could be a problem ?

Unless we really could get a criminology forum somewhere?

ConfusedBuyer

Haha Sorry but hes dead right

Maximilian

This thread is pointless, so I'm closing it. The OP obviously has an axe to grind, so I suggest he takes it to Feedback if he wants to pursue it.