Allow me to preface this post by stating I have absolutely nothing personally against Esprix. On the contrary, I realize this doper is highly regarded here, and has participated in some very interesting threads.
I am concerned however with the thread located here
In this post Esprix asks to borrow a hundred bucks and by the end of the thread (which was subsequently closed with no explanation) Astro has agreed to lend the money for a period of thirty days.
Again, let me reiterate that I am not impugning Esprix’s good name in any way. One doper stated he “was good for it”, and that’s good enough for me.
What I am wondering is what kind of a precedent might be set by allowing this at all? What if someone asks for a loan and it isn’t paid back? Could make for lots of bad feelings, and this is something I would not wish to see on SDMB. I have seen that Dopers are very caring and giving people, and are always there when a helping hand is needed. I would hate to see it abused.
My intentions with this post are not to malign Astro’s generosity or criticize Esprix. Just asking if this is a good idea.
Thanks for reading this lengthy post and I’ll look forward to your replies.
We are asking posters not to solicit money at the SDMB, unless you have permission from the administration (which permission would only be given very rarely, for extraordinary circumstances.)
I can tell you what the results were of the legal review that I had done for my Board, which was, allowing Members to solicit directly for money can and will very easily entangle the Board in any legal action which may arise as a result of one party being dissatisfied with the outcome, payback, interest, leins, processing, distribution, or any other disposition of the money or its payback.
So, if someone posts “Please contribute money for my house downpayment”, and $5000 in Paypal donations come into them, and the Board has no prior extensive legal disclaimer as a condition of Membership AND allows the donations to happen and the thread to stay open and visible, then in some jurisdictions the Board is acting as a financial tool (or something, I forget the exact words) and is now implicitly a party to the agreement. So if the person takes the $5000 and spends it on booze, and the Members want their money back, then in theory they can name the SDMB as a defendant.
This, according to my lawyer, in no way prevents people from spontaneously donating funds to another based on their postings. So a person saying “I’m bummed out - I want to go to this event, but don’t have enough cash right now. Oh well.” is fine, and that does not involve the Board. But saying “I need someone on this Board to loan me money (especially if it is a specific amount) so I can go to the event.” means that the SDMB is now a party to the transaction.
Just an FYI. Obviously, you guys will set whatever rules you wish and desire, I just wanted to add some additional backing to your decision.
Quasi, all good points, that obviously the moderators agree with. Although I posted it more as a joke than as a serious Jerry Lewis impersonation, that’s why it was closed. astro and I have come to a mutual understanding and hold this board and the Chicago Reader harmless.
I can’t believe you didn’t get your ass handed to you for that one, especially on the heels of the e-bay thing (Which IMO, was actually kind of funny).
Fascinating post, Fenris. You slam Handy and then, apparently without even seeing the irony, tell us our comments aren’t appropriate for the ATMB forum?
OK.
I believe my comments weren’t pit material. I still feel that way.
I was careful when I made that post where I was posting, and believe, honestly, that I stayed within the guidelines of this forum. There’s no criticism of board administration, or a particular admin or mod. There isn’t even a shot at a poster- I simply said I thought he dodged a bullet, and was lucky, especially given recent events and a post that comes off as almost glib and indifferent to what I thought was a well known taboo around here.
It’s hardly a slam to point out that he didn’t use the
function. I didn’t call him names, I didn’t suggest he be banned, all I did was suggest that Esprix may have had a better grasp on board functions thanhandy, 'specially after handy insulted esprix.
Not that my comment wasn’t snarky, but it’s not nearly in the same league as your comment or handy’s personal insult. (Although, you’re right. NONE of this belongs here. So unless this gets pitted (and I’m betting it’ll be closed instead), I’m outta here)
