Received Infraction for admittedly seeking legal advice

omnithanos

I received an infraction in relation to comments made on the following thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057370446

I did not admit to seeking free legal advice on this thread as alledged. As I have explained to the moderator my comment was that I would not pay for legal advice and I did not see the need to elaborate that I had problems dealing with Solicitors before and that I have a number for free legal advice in Maynooth stored in my phone which I obtained from the notice board at the library in Celbridge and it is there that I will seek any further legal advice.

My question on this thread was about conflict of interest and was a general one which made no reference or connection to any actual case.

The Moderator replied that I was seeking legal advice on the legal discussions board previous to this (before I had read the rules) but I do not feel this is relevant to the thread in question. I gave the analogy of Ronaldo getting fouled but being booked because he has a reputation for diving.

Mr. Incognito made a connection between this thread and my previous posts.

Whippet gave me a link to a thread about some looney lawyers debate on this thread based on my previous posts not this one.

It was they who hijacked my thread.

In my third post on this thread I even made an apology for my previous indiscretions on this board.

I am quite new to the boards with far less than 50 posts and I am not a subversive. I have been banned from the Legal Discussion board for a week by hulaballo for cheekily posting "is this post ok Mr. Mustard" in my last thread about the legality of dissing someones religion after being disciplined by him which ban I accept but I feel the infraction is unwarranted.

Dades

Have you discussed this infraction with the mod who handed it out via PM (private message)?

If not, that is the first step before a CMod looks at your case.

omnithanos

Yes I put my case to the Moderator and I have mentioned their reply here already and I reiterate:
The Moderator replied that I was seeking legal advice on the legal discussions board previous to this (before I had read the rules) but I do not feel this is relevant to the thread in question. I gave the analogy of Ronaldo getting fouled but being booked because he has a reputation for diving.

I mentioned this in my second pm to the Moderator but did not receive a reply.

The Moderator took an inference from my comment about seeking free legal advice based on my previous posts that wasn't intended. I have confirmed what my intent was.

Dades

It wasn't clear if the reply you mention was in a thread, or a PM.

A CMod will take a look in due course.

Taltos

Thanks Dades and omni.

OK I'll look into this for you. Please forward on your PM exchange with the mod.

Regarding your point around Ronaldo, a) I don't like soccer, but b) previous postings in a forum are very pertinent to how you are dealt with by mods of that forum. That doesn't mean if you mess up once you are marked for life but it has a bearing on how mods may approach complaints around ones posts if that makes sense.

Anyway, send me on the PMs and I'll start to look into this a bit deeper.

Taltos

omnithanos

My second pm to the moderator is not included where I made the analogy with Ronaldo and stated that I had asked for advice on just two occasions, one directly and one indirectly using an analogy with lockers representing the building, Mars Bars representing the contents in the building and an invented individual called Ron Keane representing the Receiver, both before I had read the rules. I didn't get a reply for that one so my message to them doesn't appear.

Taltos

OK Omni, a few things really.

While I can see you joined in 2011, your low post count leads me to believe you aren't here all that much, as such I am going to take the assumption that you haven't really been browsing the forums to get a feel for what is appropriate and not.

So in no particular order.
1. Past history in a forum speaks directly to you I am afraid. Hacking your soccer analogy, if you dive once in a game you will be known as a diver and will be treated accordingly unless of course over a period of time you keep your nose clean from any more pesky red / yellow cards. No black cards there or here yet.

2. Forum charter - each and every poster is expected to read the charter. Denial of its content is no protection from mod action and some fora go so far as to include admitting you haven't read the charter as a cardable offense... Not kidding here - you have to take responsibility here to get an understanding of what is expected of posters in the fora you use. Part of this is also just reading some threads for a bit to get a feel for what is permitted and what isn't.

3. Personal abuse / comments - in the same thread you link to above you made some comments around three posters. This is not on - and on it's own will result in a ban, the fact you weren't banned for that post is frankly down to either dumb luck or a call by the mod team to be kind and to let your current ban cover it too. You also use similar language above here, which makes me think that this is unconscious on your part - please do take care, remember be civil or don't post. In the forums that is referred to as "attack the post not the poster" - personal attacks can be dealt with very strictly depending on what was posted and on the forum in question.

A reasonable and intelligent response at last

Whippet and Mr. Incognito only seem to want to take the michael and monsieur inconnu doesn't even read the posts properly.

4. In the space of two days I have quickly counted 4 threads from you on this one forum, in the interests of fairness some fora have asked posters not to start a huge glut of threads in quick succession. While not strictly called out in the charter this falls under discretion of the mod / disruption.

5. Finally if you have an issue with mod direction on a thread PM the mod, don't take a thread off topic by posting on it in a thread or asking a mod in another thread "Is this OK? <insert mod name>" or similar.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to bash you here or try to prove why the infraction is justified. I am just pointing out that in the last short while you are coming to the attention of the mods for all the wrong reasons. In terms of this infraction, I can see both ways here, I can see why the mod interpreted it as they did, you seeking free legal advice here, (goes back to the charter about being concise and clear); but I can also see it from your viewpoint and am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt in this instance on the following provisio.

So to my suggestion/compromise. Having spelt some of this out for you I am willing to reverse the Infraction if you will read the charter and reply back stating you have done so and will do your best to post inline with it, so for example if you've future concerns over whether a thread is permitted or not contact the mod team and ask them first in a reasonable fashion, and similarly will abstain from making personal comments about other posters.

So what do you think? Can you please let me know you've read the charter and will post in accordance with it or do you want instead to seek Admin input on this issue?

Thanks
Taltos

omnithanos

Thanks Taltos,

Seems very reasonable and thorough.
I did a quick search for the Legal Discussion Charter but did not come across it.
I did read the general rules. If you have a direct link to the charter that would be handy otherwise I'll find it myself and definately read it before I go back there. I'm banned for a week anyway. I have found the boards useful in the past with regards to Landlord issues but I hadn't been posting and I hadn't been in legal before. I went past bargaintown the other day and was reminded of my situation cos I used to get furniture there. I was being genuine about going for the free legal aid and I certainly won't be acting on anything that was posted in any of the forums.

Thanks for you help Taltos.

PS Do you really not like football or were you quoting a line from the Trip?

omnithanos

Ok I found and read the Charter and will post in accordance with it in the future.

I now understand why the moderator made the decision as I had unconsciously broken most of the rules and it states the following "Members will not be allowed to rely on their comments having been taken the wrong way if there is a pattern of posts that are open to interpretation" which explains why they didn't go for my Ronaldo analogy. Had I cited Drogba I may have gotten away with it as they have Mourhino as their avatar. (I'll have to stop naming people like that)

I did think this site was a bit OTT on rules but all things considered they are more useful than not so I'll behave.

Taltos

Cool - thats great omni.
I know at first glance sometimes it seems we can go ott in the application of the rules but on balance and as you use the forum more I think you'll see why the rules are there.

I'll request the infraction be lifted now, please allow a few hours for processing.

Thanks and happy posting.

Taltos

(Admin please mark as resolved).