[QUOTE=DrDeth]
Is the SDMB going to certify and verify who is and who is not a “professional”? :dubious: In other words, what is seems that Samclem is saying is that he will tolerate a poster that claims to be a lawyer “coming in and giving specific advice” but not a Poster that doesn;t claim to be a Lawyer. In other words, it seems to be that an unverified claim on the part of a Poster as to their IRL occupation will give them special status. :dubious: Now, I can see that **Bricker ** and Gfactor being part of the SDSAB have been vetted to a degree. And I am sure that some poster somewhere has met a couple of the other posters that claim to be lawyers and seen a business card or sumthin. So, I am not doubting that they are lawyers. What I am troubled with is that a claim to a IRL occupation gives you official special treatment by Staff here.
So, unless the SDMB is going to guarantee that they have verified and checked that a Poster is a Member of the Bar in a certain state, I think that **Samclem ** is wrong. No Members should be given special treatment on the part of Staff based upon what they claim their IRL occupation is. In other words, specific legal advice threads should be banned. General legal question threads should be open to all, and the OP needs must consider the source- and consider that the source is mearly a claim, not verified by the SDMB. In other words, if someone who claims to be a lawyer posts and gives an answer, the OP may choose to give that greater weight than another Member who claims no such occupation. But the Moderators should have no business using their “moderator hats” to tell the “amateurs” they are wrong and Warn them- especially as the Moderators don’t really know that the Amateurs are wrong- they just know that a Member who claims to be a lawyer says they are. In other words, the Mod is making a ruling based upon a Posters unverified claim of the IRL occupation and expertise.
And even so- an attorney may well be a Member of the Bar, and still know jack-shit about a certain question. The question may be outside his speciality, or the Lawyer may practice in another state. Hell, one of my friends is a Judge, and says all the time he knows very little current law outside of his field (Workers Comp). If a JUDGE doesn’t think he is qualfified to give an opinion on specific legal questions outside his specialty- how so is a *claimed * attorney from another state yet? Hell, many general legal questions here could be answered better by a sharp paralegal, law student or law clerk than “a specialized in another field entirely Bar Member from another state IRL attorney”.
The SDMB has no business is saying one Members opinion is better than another- we all pay the same fees. Too specific threads should be closed and elsewise-Caveat Emptor. And, I have no problem with a Mod sticking his “Moderator hat” wearing head in and saying that, in fact it’d be a good idea from time to time.
[/QUOTE]
Nonsense. Good moderation is not blind. Posters that have developed their reputations over time and can lay claim to real-life expertise should most definitely be recognized in specific areas. We don’t need to officially examine school transcripts or licenses to know whether to value my opinion over Qadgop’s if the issue involves dermoid cysts. I paid just as much in membership fees last year as he did, but, shockingly, that does not make my opinion on the dermoid cyst issue equal to his. And even though he paid as much as I did, I humbly suggest that my view on elements of common-law fraud is worth more than his.
And there is no particular reason, your misplaced attempt at egalitarianism notwithstanding, that the moderation of this board should be blind to that.
)