One thing that can be gleamed from the Beagles’ behaviour is that they have double standards, and that applies pretty much to everything.
Some of the Ban Club members were accused/suspected of leaking information and those suspicions were enough for the Beagles to decide to get rid of the suspects, without further investigation. Clearly leaking information is something the Beagles are very much against, unless they are the recipients of the leaked information.
The Beagles always welcome tidbits of information and they do use it in various ways. They do not hesitate to turn the leaked information to their advantage, and have even been known to twist and distort the contents of private communications between parties that did not involve them, beyond recognition, and attempt to use these communications against those people who have fallen from grace.
As per comments posted on this thread, when a poster highlighted the fact that Their Nemesis never read not only what the OPs and other posters write, but not even his own posts, which are often full of typos and various mistakes, Kate’s response was that it was preferable to have contributors who post with typos rather than no contributors. A very laudable attitude, was it not for the fact that a number of contributors were banned for personal and political reasons that didn’t even have anything to do with the quality or content of their posts.
In other words, when it comes to Their Favourites, they take the view that all is forgiven because everyone is a volunteer giving their time freely to help others and they really appreciate their contributions. When it comes to people they dislike or clash with, for whatever reason, then it’s clearly preferable not to have volunteers giving their time freely to help posters than to have on board people who may challenge them or may be friends with the wrong crowd from their perspective.
The Beagles have set out procedures to be followed in certain cases, for example, if someone wishes to complain about the site content, they have detailed what to do and what they can be expected to do about the complaint. They require the complainant to send an email to their admin email address and provide details of the complaint being made. All well and good and pretty much in keeping with the way most sites would handle similar matters. Only when it comes to them submitting their own complaints, then they don’t see fit to follow their own procedure of sending an email via the website to start with. Instead, they take a heavy-handed approach, involving private investigators and solicitors from Day One!
It’s OK for their site to be used as a platform to criticise and discredit a variety of individuals, businesses and organisations. Financial institutions, law firms, debt and claims management companies, other forums, debt purchasers and DCAs, bailiff companies, etc. You name it, they have been the subject of criticism and discredit on Legal Beagles, not necessarily by the Beagles themselves, but certainly by various posters. Nothing new here, most consumer forums are used as a place where people can have their say. They have now set up a sister ratings and comparison site, presumably that will mean the companies featured on there will be reviewed and rated positively or negatively. Nothing wrong with that, only when it comes to criticism, they’ve shown they just can’t take any themselves.