Can someone please explain the rules for Great Debates?

True.

But having gone to law school any lawyer is better placed to read the law than the rest of us.

Same as the doctor in your family can give some basic medical advice on many subjects not in their specialty. They are free to note (and should note) if that area is not in their expertise. But they will likely have some basic notion of what is going on that is (probably) better than your average person on the internet with no such education.

Also, if they are still a lawyer, they most likely have access to LexisNexis which the rest of us do not have access to, so they could see if there is any relevant case law.

I - and I believe everyone on the moderation staff - do consider every report a good one. It never hurts to do so and allows us a valuable multiplier in our ability to cover our fora.

But just because we welcome reports does not require us to act upon them. If I acted on all reports in GD and PE that would be dozens of warnings per month. Back when traffic was high hundreds, maybe? No one wants that.

Nor do we owe anyone who reports the post any explanation for our decision. The report gives us a head’s up that something needs to be reviewed and possibly acted upon but it doesn’t require any explanation of our actions. If you feel strongly that something needed to be acted upon but wasn’t you may PM a mod - happens reasonably often - or start a thread here in ATMB.

But note, again, that a person making a report is NOT the authority on whether something is rule-breaking nor a decision-making on what rule nor how it is enforced. Very VERY often - perhaps a simple majority of reports I see from GD and PE can be boiled down to ‘I hate this guy and what he says! Punish him!’ sometimes in inflammatory language and sometimes in well-reasoned argument. Neither really effects my decision.

What you CAN expect - and I assure you it’s the case - is that all reports are read and reviewed. They’re not ignored - as you put it - but rather the situation has been looked at and determined not to need intervention.

Any answers, mister moderato?