Some context is in order. Your laundry analogy seems to suggest that Stoid’s original question was about what she should do in her case. This is not the case.
Her question was a general one: “I’d like your thoughts on the meaning of the terms in the title, as well as “probative facts” and “evidentiary facts”.” (The title was: "I’m appealing. Attorneys: ultimate facts/ law v. equity in practice… ")
I don’t see anything that’s been said in this thread that has a bearing on the question of why the appropriate answer to this question could not have been a brief explanation (or “thoughts”) or “I don’t know and can’t be bothered to find out”.
Stoid was not asking anyone to tell her how she should apply these issues to her case. The great fear of the lawyers was that even if they gave general thoughts about the issue, she would on her own misapply them to her case and then turn around and sue them, or that they would be disciplined by their state bar. This was not reasonable, IMHO, and in any event, your analogy here is not appropriate.
I would like to say in reply to what Stoid said a few pages earlier; I and I doubt anyother ;lawyer on this forum cannot said to have been “happy” or delighted in Stoid’s defeat. I never take joy in others misfortune. I enjoy winning cases, but I do not enjoy seeing people hit with adverse consequences.
It became more and more clear to me as I read more about this case, tha5 Stoid had no hope, but I still wished her well and I still do.
I dunno, reread her first 3 posts in the thread you linked to. When anyone comes into my world and says ‘medicines not that hard any great debates doper can probably handle it, don’t you dare talk down to me I’m on a first name basis with all the librarians in the medical library and all I want is information,’ my lawsuit deflector shield snaps right up.
I think anyone who has gone through higher education (grad school, med school, law school, etc.) has a natural reaction of getting a bit defensive when someone with no training suddenly assumes that they can just magically do whatever it is that you went to school to do. Now, I’ve never been to law school (and freely admit that I know next to nothing about the law), but I’ve done my time in grad school and I’ve encountered this attitude a few times - people who remember their grade 12 biology class and have watched a few episodes of Nova, so suddenly they understand all about advanced biology. The problem is that these people usually have no idea what they don’t know. This is already annoying, and these people just want to talk - I can’t imagine how much more annoying it would be if they actually wanted advice.
It is just unbelievably condescending and insulting for someone to assume that they are so very smart that they can just pop down to the library and replicate years of dedicated study. Why do they think that someone would spend thousands of dollars and many years of their lives learning a field if it was that easy? It’s sort of insinuating that you are some kind of idiot who pays for things that can so easily be learned by the common folk.
Of course, there are some people who are capable of teaching themselves complex subjects, but they are pretty few and far between. Even those people would probably want to respectfully ask advice from experts, rather than demand that they give them free ‘information’. And when those experts collectively tell you that you have lost the plot entirely, they might listen and at least think about that. But instead, we get:
It’s not special magic to finish law school, but it is an accomplishment achieved from years of effort. The fact is that Stoid believed that she is just so smart and special that she could replicate this accomplishment with only a fraction of that effort. This is an annoying stance to start with, and her constant and vicious insulting of anyone who did go to law school (including her previous attorney, her ex’s attorney, and various judges) only made it worse.
I have nothing more to add than what’s already been said, but this was a civil case, and as such, is a matter of public record. Short of an order by the court sealing the file, you have no right to privacy concerning this matter.
Sure, but she made a huge issue about something that is freely available in the public record. I have better things to do myself, but she has to expect that if someone is curious they may go and find the information available to them as a matter of right.
Finding it out for yourself is one thing, but then taking what you’ve find out and posting it at the board is another. The second one crosses the line of what people should be doing at the SDMB.
I disagree. This thread is at least the third in a series of epic multi-page threads involving Stoid’s legal issues. When researching the actual facts as recorded one finds a much simpler picture. A picture in which she was wrong from the begining, and *in the wrong *not only by her actions, but in the eyes of the court. On every issue that she addressed.
The time to protect **Stoid’s **privacy ended when she refused the advice, given repeatedly long ago, to seek council and discontinue her postings on this matter.
And, yes, Arnold Winkelried you have offered your opinion about the revelation of details at least 4 times so far in this thread. Quite a bit of junior-modding in a thread where the actual mods have remained silent.
The actual facts ARE relevant after literally hundreds of posts of BS. The public interest is served by making these records available, that is why they are publicly posted
Hopefully Stoid has learned a lesson about sharing such details about a public, civil action, but I doubt it.
My great great grandfather (I think) may have been German but that’s about as close as I come. I’m a Californian.
Also, it was not me who was being corrected about the period going inside the quotation marks anyway. Although I agree that it is a stupid convention (if that helps).
I have been a bit of a broken record on the topic, but my last two posts on the topic were disagreeing with people who were trying to excuse the posting of IRL information, not just posting the same thing over and over with no reason. So 4 posts in a 375-post thread (as of now), about 1% of the posts: I think it can hardly be said that I am dominating the conversation here.
In addition, this is not junior modding. I could add an “In my opinion” disclaimer at the beginning of every one of my posts, but it should be clear that this is only my opinion. Junior modding would be telling posters “you are breaking board rules”. It is possible to post without breaking board rules and still have the posts be rude or even unethical, that’s what I have been saying and still believe.
IN MY OPINION, the right way to handle this would be to ask the poster (in this case Stoid), via PM or e-mail, “Do you mind if I post the result of your appeal?” However irritated you may be at a poster, it doesn’t justify posting her private stuff. We don’t have a right to know the personal details, however curious we may be.
I have not remained silent – as Crotalus noted above, I broke the original link to the appeal and gave my reasons for it several pages ago.
Speaking as a moderator: It is not appropriate for anyone to “out” the real-life identity of another Doper, regardless of the wisdom (or lack thereof) of how he or she has posted about what’s going on in real life.
And with that, I’m going to lock this thread. If you have additional questions about public identities vs. board personae, start a thread in ATMB.