We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
For the past few days, this new mod has been indulging in excessive moderation and biased politics as is quite apparent from the comment section, and the weird topics climbing to the top of the conversations list.
This website is already degraded and has become a troll website where anyone could anonymously write any crap, and the mod is doing absolutely nothing about it other than taking strong positions and dirty politics which could only be considered as a Misuse of Power.
Hence I think we should petition to change this mod
Having said that, I find your justification for redacting the innocuous part of my comment on this thread that I had posted a discussion thread on a sedition issue without any substance. When you did not allow that discussion thread to be published in the first place, then where is the question of LI readers to relate my comment with that post, and how can my comment be seen as revealing the identity?
Of course you have clearly stated that you will not answer my second point :)
Regarding your second point, we probably can't really discuss this in an open forum without it resulting in revealing exactly the information which you accepted does not need to be published.
I also see that you have carefully avoided responding to:
Quote:
I can also point out to serveral comments that LI has allowed in the past without any verification or redaction that clearly identified certain individual against whom this same firm was making slanderous accusations.
But thanks for your comment, which has highlighted that we should moderate this kind of content more strictly, since it's progenitors are clearly trollish who indulge in ad hominem.
The moderator has blacked out my post, just because it does not suit his agenda of showing only the RW in bad light, no other party. LOL. What a complete 💩 and 🤡.
E.g. I posted about some seditious activities of ▮▮▮ of that firm, it was not even published.
This is not a matter for laughs given that there are not too many forums for us to expose what goes in the law firms.
You might be interested in the following discussion on moderation going on at the moment: https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/242082#comment-242180
At this point, we don't feel there is a strong argument to be made for moderators not to have or share their opinions: after all, wouldn't you rather know why your post might be moderated as trollish rather than moderators operating in the shadows and secretly?
Second, some topics simply get no responses or engagement. LI is supposed to be a platform for the open exchange and discussion of ideas. When no one responds, just like in a political panel debate, it should be the moderator's job to play devil's advocate or provide a counterpoint. If the counterparty fails to engage, the moderator should terminate the discussion or at least not invite them back to the table in future.
[2] I agree with 'Alias' 100%. As of now you're representing LI as platform not your anonymous self, there is a difference. I don't think you would have to sacrifice your anonymity to express your views, you can simply make another account (with an Alias) if that's possible or comment like everyone else with as much opinion as you want.
That's quite an interesting question OP. You guys could use try guessing it like when we used to guess R's identify.
Relevant Threads:
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/190826-who-is-r
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/188774-who-is-r
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/200888-way-to-figure-out-who-r-is[This is one of my favourite threads. Here R actively participated in the thread by marking the incorrect comments as 'contested', fun right?]
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/211730-the-r-mystery
If you ask me, my best guess would be that it's Kian himself. I can also back my claim to a certain extent, as:
1. R previously mentioned that Kian sporadically moderates the comments while handling the administrative part of LI. (Thread attached above)
2. I suspect that the reason R signed off every comment he made was to differentiate himself from Kian, as Kian didn't. And just after R went inactive the new mod didn't adopt the signing off method which was an already established one.
3. The mod seems to be well-versed with western politics and has been quite active in sharing his insight whenever these topics pop-up, which would happen only if the moderator is comfortable with audience he is interacting with. (Not a strong point but one to consider)
4. If you check Kian's profile, it's not like he has been inactive, he has logged in on October itself.
5. The moderator previously stated that he is not a law student, meaning that he has graduated. To hire someone who has already graduated would require a good monetary backing but Legally India as of now has no revenue streams apart from selling a few cookies. It seems highly implausible that he would hire someone to do the job which requires barely half an hour. And no one who is getting paid would be this lazy to moderate.
6. The usual moderation timing in India is around 5:00 AM (GMT +5). From the lifestyle of an Indian corporate lawyer it seems the least possible time to moderate. While in UK the time would be around 12:00 PM (GMT +0) which is quite a perfect time to moderate after doing your daily job.
Second: if everyone else can comment anonymously on LI, why can't LI moderator?
If you're such a good troll-detector, then don't publish such pointless threads and then use them for the self-promotion of your personal ideologies. I don't get why I have to tell you this, but when you're moderating, you might want to avoid expressing all of your personal views on an issue and then also being the arbiter deciding which arguments are trollish. Use another ID or reveal your real identity like Kian did. That'll make people stop engaging in ad hominem arguments against you.
Actually, quite funny. When moderator asks questions that trolls have no answers to / try to rein in untruths, trolls get into ad hominem. Don't shoot the messenger, write more intelligent messages. 🙏
Thanks to your pathetic moderation skills, this half-defunct website has descended further into discussing irrelevant topics that are trollish and essentially, self-promoting by name (look at the cheap thread on Indian intellectuals who compare with their Western counterparts). I can't believe we'd rather have R back.