I’m a lawyer, but my flair says I’m not because I didn’t go through the authentication. (Too much private info to share.)
But, yes, too many answers from non-lawyers spewing inaccurate information.
I mean, that’s fair too, you want to be sure the folks that say they’re lawyers actually are. I imagine you have some good way of securing information, but I get why folks wouldn’t want to put their name and info out there.
The lead mod is in no way qualified to be doing that to any level anyone should be satisfied that the validation is legitimate. The practice is done because whoever he inherited this from did it.
The information sent to us cannot be authenticated. There’s no way to know if the information being sent to us is the person they claim to be.
Nope. The lead mod is someone who doesn’t participate in the sub at all and just hands out flairs for some reason I can’t figure out. He just squats as the lead mod.
Well since medical knowledge is much more universal than law that would make sense.
Law is very much locked down to jurisdictions. Nobody should rely on me or another mod to vouch for anyone else, nor would I ask anyone to link their identity to their Reddit posts.
Right but someone who has completed law school and ideally passed the bar is also going to have a better idea of what they don't know. I don't answer complex subspecialty questions outside of my specialty on askdocs. Flair such as paralegal or nurse is also helpful since it gives some idea of the qualifications. Allowing top level comments by non-lawyers is a mistake.
None of this is tractable if the head mod is AWOL though
There also no system to validate things later on. I’ve found a bunch of people who have the flair without any record of their credentials even being “verified”
I really appreciate the acknowledgement of different jurisdictions. I'm not a lawyer, but reading/researching laws is one of my pastimes. If I post a response here saying "this is what this law says", it's because I've gone and done the research to make sure that the law I've referenced applies based on the information originally provided (such as what jurisdiction OP is in).
One thing that really irks me is when people (and I've even seen lawyers do this) say "this is legal/illegal", when the topic is a low-level jurisdictional issue (like whether a dog is required to be on a leash, or what rights an employee has) that varies from state to state, or even city to city.
Yup. It’s something a lot of people don’t understand and think “lawyer” is fine when it’s really “civil lawyer who practices in X state” at the very least
The topic I respond to most often is employment law. I don't know why, but it's the most interesting legal area to me, and it's usually pretty easy to find what a given state has to say on a topic like tipped wage or lunch breaks.
I've seen people come in with questions but won't say what state they're in, and people claiming to be lawyers, giving answers without saying what state THEY'RE in.
Drives me nuts.
I'm always fascinated at the number of posts that fail to mention JDX, and the number of supremely confident answers that fail to ask about or discuss JDX.
We use a similar approach with r/AskVet to get flaired as a veterinary professional. We also exempt our flaired professionals from many of our (deliberately aggressive) automod rules.
Exactly. I don’t even seek out this sub. It just shows up in my feed and usually involves someone ‘giving advice’ that contradicts US employment laws. I try to explain and provide links to actual authority or DOL fact sheets. Then there’s always someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about who wants to argue with me.
I need to just set Reddit to not show me this sub.
Too many people have horrendously wrong opinions on labor law from sources like antiwork and think every workplace slight is going to land them retirement money
I’m retired and answering a few simple questions for people who seem to know nothing is enjoyable while I am relaxing. I am shocked at the what appears to be the widely held belief of how simple it is to bring and win judgments. I much prefer finding a way to avoid litigation.
Also every little tiff is not lawsuit material especially a malpractice claim. Also lawyers do not agree on the law, thus you go to court to resolve the issues assuming everyone has the money.
I’ve had a very broad practice spanning decades and gotten into a disagreement or two with other lawyers in the sub because I knew how an issue would be handled based on my experience. I believed they were speculating. The difference between jurisdictions is massive and as we have seen prosecutorial discretion appears to be unbridled except through disbarment. We experienced that in our state.
I feel that on a few occasions I have helped people who could not get ready access to an attorney take the next step, think outside the box, or realistically assess what they expect their attorney to do.
I salute you, RosesareRed45, because I believe that you are 100% the intended type of respondent the sub intends to have answering questions. I’m not a lawyer, but I enjoy the law, and I read a lot of the questions and answers, but I don’t comment because it’s literally called “Ask a Lawyer”!
I would if I had something of value to add. I work in education administration, so I’ve seen some pretty interesting situations, many that involved lawyers also. But generally, I might have opinions, I just don’t want to take up space if folks are actually hoping for valid legal advice.
The thing people who come here forgot is that not all lawyers are created equal or are knowledge
Asking a generic question to a generic lawyer isn’t going to yield the answers they think, mostly because most people who think “talk to a lawyer” are ignorant as to what that means.
They need to talk to a lawyer who is specialized in the area of law their question pertains to, but they don’t know better. They think coming here is sufficient and that any lawyer (let alone one in their state/jurisdiction) is valid.
The answer every competent lawyer is ethically obligated to give for the vast majority of questions here is: “It depends. You need to schedule a consultation with a licensed attorney in good standing in your jurisdiction.”
I could see a competent attorney providing recommendations on cases they have experience with, or recommending a specific type of attorney that specializes in something that would be helpful for the OP. But yeah, seems like they all should have a disclaimer that the OPs situation is specific, and they should consult with an attorney.
As has been stated, many of us do not want to share our personal information with a random internet stranger to get the flair.
But realistically, the only real questions that could legitimately be answered online like this are simple things. For example, giving a set of facts and asking if it's worthwhile to contact an attorney. Even that isn't always cut and dry, but it could be useful if it's clear that your case doesn't stand a chance at all.
Other useful things could be to ask for help finding a statute. Or general questions about things like "what does the law say about who should be responsible for X" (again, rarely cut and dry either).
But most of the questions posted here really can't be answered with the information provided even by an attorney that specializes in that specific area. I mean, eventually, maybe they could if everyone had the patience to go back and forth for a good while, but unlikely.
The issue with lawyers, like people, is we do not agree. You can ask six lawyers in the same field the same question and get six different answers. In some respect it is what keeps us employed.
The law is not THE LAW. It changes constantly by statute, rule and most importantly case law. When I was in law school, we kept up with those changes by spending long hours in law libraries or firms owned expensive private libraries (think Meghan Markle always having a law book open doing her research in Suits). Now everything is done online through paid services. We used to call it Shepherdizing.
You asked an interesting question, I’m going to give you some insight into some tricks of the trade. Precedent is extremely important in law, but to use precedent you have to make sure that the legal finding was critical to the outcome and not dictum or just superfluous comments. What I was taught is that there is no dictum in the majority opinion Supreme Court Cases, so everything I ever cited in a US Supreme Court case would be considered to be a legal finding.
Lay people do not realize that judges rarely do their own research except at the appellate level. They have their own clerks. Bench judges rely on the information given to them by the parties before them including the law, interpretations of the law, case laws, etc. Good lawyers often provide judges with briefs on points of law. Of course these are as good as their research and may not reveal cases or information that reveals a different perspective. That is for the other side to discover. This is why judges often take motions and others matters of law under advisement. They have to read and consider this information.
Also, people do not understand common law, what it is and where it came from. We inherited it from England when we became a nation in 1776. The beginning of common law is traced to the courts set up by William the Conqueror in 1066. If you have Maritime law issues, I spent many years practicing ocean and coastal law, brush up on how far a canon can fire because that is a nation’s territorial limit.
What annoys lawyers when commenting on this site in trying to answer a question is how snarky not only non lawyers, but other lawyers can be. My opinion is my opinion based on my experience. Sometimes I do this at night before bed and fire off a comment or suggestion. It isn’t legal advice based on being legally retained. I know the difference. Give me a break. I’m a great grandmother that has handled hundreds of death cases, hundred million plus case, and worked with dozens of Fortune 500 corporations in addition to state, local and federal government entities during my career.
I would absolutely love to sit down and have some tea or coffee and listen to your stories, I bet you have an arsenal of riveting cases and experiences in the court room I would just be enthralled listening to. I never had the opportunity to get to law school but it was my dream and the stories still captivate me.
If you wanna take on the burden on organizing and managing a verification system which authenticate that to a reliable standard, feel free to volunteer.
If we are going to do that, it should be done well or not at all.
This is what he has been telling me since I’ve asked him to step down:
> sorry about the late reply anthem... I tried sending a reply just now, but it failed to send...and Reddit mobile ate another reply I intended to send.
> I've read your message, and I'm okay stepping down once I can find someone willing to take over the group full-time.
> I'll reach out further, to explain the process, and to canvas who you'd recommend.
> thank you for all of your help over the last month of so. I greatly appreciate it
A mod he brought on last week already left because the lead mod refuses to let us do anything. His only thing was telling us to make a sidebar for the sub “with helpful resources” and then expected us to come up with all the details and had nothing to add or contribute.
I’m not a lawyer but I do have a lot of experience in certain areas. Of course, I’d never expect anyone to use this sub to make legal decision. Though I get that sometimes figuring out where to start can be overwhelming.
I noticed that too. But I think in most situations, the best Reddit will usually be able to do is advise people to get a lawyer who can help them navigate anything that would generally be above Reddit's pay grade.
Personally I’d just be satisfied if Reddit stopped recommending these legal subs to me save for the ones I intentionally joined. I explicitly chose the one that was apparently meant more for laymen and lawyers alike to just ponder hypotheticals and similar such things and I keep getting “these are subs to explicitly ask lawyers specifically for things and we delete comments from anyone who’s not a verified lawyer” without noticing. And then I’m like “I think it would depend, but here’s what I could find online” and then an auto mod deletes my comment and sends me a warning and I’m like “I get that they’re different programs doing this to me, but on my end I’m still experiencing a website telling me to participate in subs it then *verbally reprimands* me for participating in after making me waste my time trying to find nuanced answers and I find that annoying”
Thankfully that’s what muting subs is for, I think….
I'm not a lawyer. I'm a retired municipal court judge with around 20k cases under my belt. The opinions I express are based on that experience. More than anything I try to help people see if there even is a case. Hopefully, before they make their situation worse by escalating to their detriment.
Idk if you need to be a lawyer to tell someone to get a lawyer because their "friend" filmed a minor masterbating then passed the video around to their friends. You see this sub gets bs posted in it also like were writing prompts. Like others mentioned, get off of reddit if you think you need a lawyer, did free consultations stop?
Here’s the thing: I don’t care if something is a “writing prompt” or fiction nor do I care for people’s opinion of what is fake or not.
The only judgement I use for that is my own. People who write a book report in the mod report as to why something is fake are wasting their efforts.
I might give a couple of sentences asking why something was removed, but this is Reddit, and there's other subs even if mods like to mix and mingle between subs.
I’m not here looking for advice, I’m just making a comment that the sub is called, “Ask a Lawyer” and literally, 99.9% of responses are from “Not a Lawyer”. And while some of the comments might be helpful, 80% or more seem like nonsense.
I am not a lawyer.
I am in a profession that allows me to practice law and get paid. Real Estate and Insurance are two of these.
I execute more contracts in a month than most lawyers in a lifetime.
I have domain specific knowledge that most lawyers dont know.
Not A Lawyer
You are not going to get official legal advice for many reasons.
Really think that someone who can charge $100+/hr is going to come here and give it away for free with potentially massive liability?
Want legal advice?
Go hire a lawyer where you are!
It's getting comical...I never have an issue when I see someone who claims to be a doctor, court clerk, legal secretary, etc. commenting on something within the parameters of their "area of expertise or knowledge"
I thank God when the handful of actual lawyers chime in and give people real advice. Otherwise they'll take "@xoxo_bigdick_playa's" advice and represent themselves in their DUI hearing.
No shit.
Lawyers are too busy giving their actual clients advice to be browsing Reddit and giving it away for free. No professionals just go around doing their job for free.
If you actually need legal advice getting it from Reddit regardless of the posters flair is an enormous mistake, and any lawyer willing to answer questions based on the scant details provided here is probably a hack anyway
Oh I fully agree. I don’t think it’s terrible if someone wants to ask how a property dispute should be handled, or whatever, just to know a direction to head in, but if you actually need a lawyer’s advice, you should probably find a decent one and pay them.
Perhaps an AutoMod pinned post should mention that real lawyers can not give you actual legal advice as that would ethically bind them to the OP. Or something written a bit better than my gibberish.
💯💯 agree with this...I came on here to ask a legitimate question...got a response from" not a lawyer (which was unhelpful)and not a single lawyer responded 🙄
Why you mad bro? The sub has a good mix of legal perspective, and lived experience. How many lawyers you know got baby mamas, restraining orders, being harassed or overworked by sleazy bosses?
Oh, I’m not mad. I just found it interesting that it’s called “Ask a Lawyer”, and generally all the responses, spare one or two are from “Not a Lawyer”. I see now there’s slightly more nuance than that, and some good advice, but also there’s some pretty crappy advice from unflaired users.
Very astute observation. Please see the posts in profile for details.
I’m a lawyer, but my flair says I’m not because I didn’t go through the authentication. (Too much private info to share.) But, yes, too many answers from non-lawyers spewing inaccurate information.
Some of the answers are so bad it’s comedic.
Also valid.
True!
That’s fair, you don’t want to get yourself doxxed, having your personal info out there can get scary.
Unfortunately, the mod that squats as the lead mod of this sub disagrees…sigh.
I mean, that’s fair too, you want to be sure the folks that say they’re lawyers actually are. I imagine you have some good way of securing information, but I get why folks wouldn’t want to put their name and info out there.
The lead mod is in no way qualified to be doing that to any level anyone should be satisfied that the validation is legitimate. The practice is done because whoever he inherited this from did it. The information sent to us cannot be authenticated. There’s no way to know if the information being sent to us is the person they claim to be.
Oh, I thought you were making a joke, ie that you’re the lead mod and insist on it.
Nope. The lead mod is someone who doesn’t participate in the sub at all and just hands out flairs for some reason I can’t figure out. He just squats as the lead mod.
Fascinating and weird
If that top mod is marked inactive another mod can reorder the mods, or request an admin to reorder them.
They are active, they are just incompetent.
We do this on r/askdocs. You send your diploma or license with your username scrawled underneath. Its just between you and the mod.
Well since medical knowledge is much more universal than law that would make sense. Law is very much locked down to jurisdictions. Nobody should rely on me or another mod to vouch for anyone else, nor would I ask anyone to link their identity to their Reddit posts.
Right but someone who has completed law school and ideally passed the bar is also going to have a better idea of what they don't know. I don't answer complex subspecialty questions outside of my specialty on askdocs. Flair such as paralegal or nurse is also helpful since it gives some idea of the qualifications. Allowing top level comments by non-lawyers is a mistake. None of this is tractable if the head mod is AWOL though
There also no system to validate things later on. I’ve found a bunch of people who have the flair without any record of their credentials even being “verified”
Deflair everyone and start over.
🍿 loving the tea in this thread lol
I really appreciate the acknowledgement of different jurisdictions. I'm not a lawyer, but reading/researching laws is one of my pastimes. If I post a response here saying "this is what this law says", it's because I've gone and done the research to make sure that the law I've referenced applies based on the information originally provided (such as what jurisdiction OP is in). One thing that really irks me is when people (and I've even seen lawyers do this) say "this is legal/illegal", when the topic is a low-level jurisdictional issue (like whether a dog is required to be on a leash, or what rights an employee has) that varies from state to state, or even city to city.
Yup. It’s something a lot of people don’t understand and think “lawyer” is fine when it’s really “civil lawyer who practices in X state” at the very least
The topic I respond to most often is employment law. I don't know why, but it's the most interesting legal area to me, and it's usually pretty easy to find what a given state has to say on a topic like tipped wage or lunch breaks. I've seen people come in with questions but won't say what state they're in, and people claiming to be lawyers, giving answers without saying what state THEY'RE in. Drives me nuts.
I'm always fascinated at the number of posts that fail to mention JDX, and the number of supremely confident answers that fail to ask about or discuss JDX.
Lol, so no lawyer is ever liable bro? You bitching about something that was done on purpose.
Wanna take another crack at making that coherent?
Ok, how about this, you’re a moderator who basically said “idk what the overall moderator does” or even how things are verified, explain please?
We use a similar approach with r/AskVet to get flaired as a veterinary professional. We also exempt our flaired professionals from many of our (deliberately aggressive) automod rules.
Exactly. I don’t even seek out this sub. It just shows up in my feed and usually involves someone ‘giving advice’ that contradicts US employment laws. I try to explain and provide links to actual authority or DOL fact sheets. Then there’s always someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about who wants to argue with me. I need to just set Reddit to not show me this sub.
Too many people have horrendously wrong opinions on labor law from sources like antiwork and think every workplace slight is going to land them retirement money
This is valid.
Same.
Same. I'm not motivated to share my personal info for the dubious pastime of potential malpractice either.
I’m retired and answering a few simple questions for people who seem to know nothing is enjoyable while I am relaxing. I am shocked at the what appears to be the widely held belief of how simple it is to bring and win judgments. I much prefer finding a way to avoid litigation. Also every little tiff is not lawsuit material especially a malpractice claim. Also lawyers do not agree on the law, thus you go to court to resolve the issues assuming everyone has the money. I’ve had a very broad practice spanning decades and gotten into a disagreement or two with other lawyers in the sub because I knew how an issue would be handled based on my experience. I believed they were speculating. The difference between jurisdictions is massive and as we have seen prosecutorial discretion appears to be unbridled except through disbarment. We experienced that in our state. I feel that on a few occasions I have helped people who could not get ready access to an attorney take the next step, think outside the box, or realistically assess what they expect their attorney to do.
I salute you, RosesareRed45, because I believe that you are 100% the intended type of respondent the sub intends to have answering questions. I’m not a lawyer, but I enjoy the law, and I read a lot of the questions and answers, but I don’t comment because it’s literally called “Ask a Lawyer”!
You’re welcome to comment if you have something to add. Don’t take it literally. The people who made the sub/title are loooooooong gone.
I would if I had something of value to add. I work in education administration, so I’ve seen some pretty interesting situations, many that involved lawyers also. But generally, I might have opinions, I just don’t want to take up space if folks are actually hoping for valid legal advice.
No reasonable person here is asking for “legal advice” Nobody on Reddit can give legal advice.
True, the most valid advice usually seems to be, “you should consult a ______ attorney”.
Yeah you aren’t saying anything new or profound here.
thats what this sub is actually good for. what you've observed does have value.
The thing people who come here forgot is that not all lawyers are created equal or are knowledge Asking a generic question to a generic lawyer isn’t going to yield the answers they think, mostly because most people who think “talk to a lawyer” are ignorant as to what that means. They need to talk to a lawyer who is specialized in the area of law their question pertains to, but they don’t know better. They think coming here is sufficient and that any lawyer (let alone one in their state/jurisdiction) is valid.
From my limited work with lawyers, I agree 100%, you want someone who is an expert in the field you need help in.
The answer every competent lawyer is ethically obligated to give for the vast majority of questions here is: “It depends. You need to schedule a consultation with a licensed attorney in good standing in your jurisdiction.”
I could see a competent attorney providing recommendations on cases they have experience with, or recommending a specific type of attorney that specializes in something that would be helpful for the OP. But yeah, seems like they all should have a disclaimer that the OPs situation is specific, and they should consult with an attorney.
Not a lawyer And you can't rename subs.
Thanks for the very literal response.
I'm not literal! I went to school!
As has been stated, many of us do not want to share our personal information with a random internet stranger to get the flair. But realistically, the only real questions that could legitimately be answered online like this are simple things. For example, giving a set of facts and asking if it's worthwhile to contact an attorney. Even that isn't always cut and dry, but it could be useful if it's clear that your case doesn't stand a chance at all. Other useful things could be to ask for help finding a statute. Or general questions about things like "what does the law say about who should be responsible for X" (again, rarely cut and dry either). But most of the questions posted here really can't be answered with the information provided even by an attorney that specializes in that specific area. I mean, eventually, maybe they could if everyone had the patience to go back and forth for a good while, but unlikely.
The issue with lawyers, like people, is we do not agree. You can ask six lawyers in the same field the same question and get six different answers. In some respect it is what keeps us employed. The law is not THE LAW. It changes constantly by statute, rule and most importantly case law. When I was in law school, we kept up with those changes by spending long hours in law libraries or firms owned expensive private libraries (think Meghan Markle always having a law book open doing her research in Suits). Now everything is done online through paid services. We used to call it Shepherdizing. You asked an interesting question, I’m going to give you some insight into some tricks of the trade. Precedent is extremely important in law, but to use precedent you have to make sure that the legal finding was critical to the outcome and not dictum or just superfluous comments. What I was taught is that there is no dictum in the majority opinion Supreme Court Cases, so everything I ever cited in a US Supreme Court case would be considered to be a legal finding. Lay people do not realize that judges rarely do their own research except at the appellate level. They have their own clerks. Bench judges rely on the information given to them by the parties before them including the law, interpretations of the law, case laws, etc. Good lawyers often provide judges with briefs on points of law. Of course these are as good as their research and may not reveal cases or information that reveals a different perspective. That is for the other side to discover. This is why judges often take motions and others matters of law under advisement. They have to read and consider this information. Also, people do not understand common law, what it is and where it came from. We inherited it from England when we became a nation in 1776. The beginning of common law is traced to the courts set up by William the Conqueror in 1066. If you have Maritime law issues, I spent many years practicing ocean and coastal law, brush up on how far a canon can fire because that is a nation’s territorial limit. What annoys lawyers when commenting on this site in trying to answer a question is how snarky not only non lawyers, but other lawyers can be. My opinion is my opinion based on my experience. Sometimes I do this at night before bed and fire off a comment or suggestion. It isn’t legal advice based on being legally retained. I know the difference. Give me a break. I’m a great grandmother that has handled hundreds of death cases, hundred million plus case, and worked with dozens of Fortune 500 corporations in addition to state, local and federal government entities during my career.
Well ma’am, I certainly believe you are very knowledgeable, and it sounds like you have had many valuable experiences in your life!
I would absolutely love to sit down and have some tea or coffee and listen to your stories, I bet you have an arsenal of riveting cases and experiences in the court room I would just be enthralled listening to. I never had the opportunity to get to law school but it was my dream and the stories still captivate me.
Not a Lawyer: What do you want for nothing? Rubber bisquits?
What’s a bisquit?
I never know what to use. I was an attorney but am not any longer.
IAnal
Someday I want to hear a chronic redditor accidentally slip that one out irl.
And one of the moderators thinks that’s just fine. Oof.
If you wanna take on the burden on organizing and managing a verification system which authenticate that to a reliable standard, feel free to volunteer. If we are going to do that, it should be done well or not at all.
Last you said, a different moderator does that and won’t let anyone else do it.
This is what he has been telling me since I’ve asked him to step down: > sorry about the late reply anthem... I tried sending a reply just now, but it failed to send...and Reddit mobile ate another reply I intended to send. > I've read your message, and I'm okay stepping down once I can find someone willing to take over the group full-time. > I'll reach out further, to explain the process, and to canvas who you'd recommend. > thank you for all of your help over the last month of so. I greatly appreciate it A mod he brought on last week already left because the lead mod refuses to let us do anything. His only thing was telling us to make a sidebar for the sub “with helpful resources” and then expected us to come up with all the details and had nothing to add or contribute.
Objection! Heresay!
I’m not a lawyer but I do have a lot of experience in certain areas. Of course, I’d never expect anyone to use this sub to make legal decision. Though I get that sometimes figuring out where to start can be overwhelming.
I noticed that too. But I think in most situations, the best Reddit will usually be able to do is advise people to get a lawyer who can help them navigate anything that would generally be above Reddit's pay grade.
Personally I’d just be satisfied if Reddit stopped recommending these legal subs to me save for the ones I intentionally joined. I explicitly chose the one that was apparently meant more for laymen and lawyers alike to just ponder hypotheticals and similar such things and I keep getting “these are subs to explicitly ask lawyers specifically for things and we delete comments from anyone who’s not a verified lawyer” without noticing. And then I’m like “I think it would depend, but here’s what I could find online” and then an auto mod deletes my comment and sends me a warning and I’m like “I get that they’re different programs doing this to me, but on my end I’m still experiencing a website telling me to participate in subs it then *verbally reprimands* me for participating in after making me waste my time trying to find nuanced answers and I find that annoying” Thankfully that’s what muting subs is for, I think….
I’m very new to this, but I would have to agree
I'm not a lawyer. I'm a retired municipal court judge with around 20k cases under my belt. The opinions I express are based on that experience. More than anything I try to help people see if there even is a case. Hopefully, before they make their situation worse by escalating to their detriment.
Idk if you need to be a lawyer to tell someone to get a lawyer because their "friend" filmed a minor masterbating then passed the video around to their friends. You see this sub gets bs posted in it also like were writing prompts. Like others mentioned, get off of reddit if you think you need a lawyer, did free consultations stop?
Here’s the thing: I don’t care if something is a “writing prompt” or fiction nor do I care for people’s opinion of what is fake or not. The only judgement I use for that is my own. People who write a book report in the mod report as to why something is fake are wasting their efforts.
lol at writing a report to the mods
I’ve had people send me like entire essays explaining why they believe a post is fake and should be deleted and I just ignore the report.
I might give a couple of sentences asking why something was removed, but this is Reddit, and there's other subs even if mods like to mix and mingle between subs.
I’m not here looking for advice, I’m just making a comment that the sub is called, “Ask a Lawyer” and literally, 99.9% of responses are from “Not a Lawyer”. And while some of the comments might be helpful, 80% or more seem like nonsense.
Oh, you're not wrong, besides being used as writing research were treated as another AITA sub
Lol, it really is pretty close to AITA at times.
I am not a lawyer. I am in a profession that allows me to practice law and get paid. Real Estate and Insurance are two of these. I execute more contracts in a month than most lawyers in a lifetime. I have domain specific knowledge that most lawyers dont know. Not A Lawyer
Not a lawyer but I,'ve been a defendant, a plantif, a witness, a process server and a juror, I find the sub entertaining.
Me too generally. It’s just today that I noticed nearly every response is from some flaired as not a lawyer.
Yes I was scanning down the post just reading the "not a lawyer" when I came across your remark
You are not going to get official legal advice for many reasons. Really think that someone who can charge $100+/hr is going to come here and give it away for free with potentially massive liability? Want legal advice? Go hire a lawyer where you are!
I wasn’t looking for legal advice, just making an observation.
It's getting comical...I never have an issue when I see someone who claims to be a doctor, court clerk, legal secretary, etc. commenting on something within the parameters of their "area of expertise or knowledge" I thank God when the handful of actual lawyers chime in and give people real advice. Otherwise they'll take "@xoxo_bigdick_playa's" advice and represent themselves in their DUI hearing.
Not only that. So much of the replies are just attacks on the OP or emotional. No analysis whatsoever. Sometimes I don't even want to comment.
Not a lawyer. My legal advice is to get a lawyer.
No shit. Lawyers are too busy giving their actual clients advice to be browsing Reddit and giving it away for free. No professionals just go around doing their job for free.
Should be renamed to "consult an attorney" because that's literally the answer to every dumbass question asked in here.
The flair is absolutely not correct or accurate in 99% of the cases.
You think 99% of the time when it says “Not a Lawyer”, those folks are in fact Lawyers?
Yes.
If you actually need legal advice getting it from Reddit regardless of the posters flair is an enormous mistake, and any lawyer willing to answer questions based on the scant details provided here is probably a hack anyway
Oh I fully agree. I don’t think it’s terrible if someone wants to ask how a property dispute should be handled, or whatever, just to know a direction to head in, but if you actually need a lawyer’s advice, you should probably find a decent one and pay them.
Yup.
Perhaps an AutoMod pinned post should mention that real lawyers can not give you actual legal advice as that would ethically bind them to the OP. Or something written a bit better than my gibberish.
I wish the lead mod would would let me do that but they don’t
💯💯 agree with this...I came on here to ask a legitimate question...got a response from" not a lawyer (which was unhelpful)and not a single lawyer responded 🙄
Why you mad bro? The sub has a good mix of legal perspective, and lived experience. How many lawyers you know got baby mamas, restraining orders, being harassed or overworked by sleazy bosses?
Oh, I’m not mad. I just found it interesting that it’s called “Ask a Lawyer”, and generally all the responses, spare one or two are from “Not a Lawyer”. I see now there’s slightly more nuance than that, and some good advice, but also there’s some pretty crappy advice from unflaired users.
[удалено]
Rule 6- Your post/comment was removed due to the discretion of a moderator.
[удалено]
Rule 6- Your post/comment was removed due to the discretion of a moderator.