This is a post inspired by some very wise comments from a banned beagle. One of the many, and one who has a lot of insight into the situations that developed in Beagleland over the past few years.
The Beagle Managers are easily impressed by anyone who claims to have certain qualifications or experience and don’t bother to verify such claims. It’s fair enough that forums are meant to offer anonymity and anyone can sign up without having to have their identity and credentials verified, however, if people want to post that they are qualified professionals or have years of practical experience in a certain area, they should be prepared to provide details of their professional qualifications and activities, at least to Site Team.
Back in 2013 a lady signed up claiming to be a retired employment barrister and she said as much on a number of her posts, yet her claims were never verified. Legal Beagles didn’t officially endorse her as an employment barrister but allowed her to say so on her posts which almost amounts to the same thing. There was something in her posting style that didn’t look right. In common with most people who want to be considered experts in their area, she posted with great authority and refused to allow anyone to contradict her or disagree with her. If someone crossed her, she would ask the management to remove those people or else she would leave.
One of the Beagle owners was so taken by her claims and the idea of having a retired barrister giving her time to contribute to the site for free that she did comply with some of those requests to remove people who crossed the lady in question. She was unmasked after doing something very silly which was more in keeping with a sulking teenager than a barrister and as a result, she also found herself joining the Ban Club.
In her posts, she never quoted any legislation or case law which is rather odd for a legal professional, most just can’t help themselves. She shared her signature with other Beagles who boasted about being banned from another site, a site this lady never even belonged to. A barrister would hardly have had a “Proud member of the Banned Club” in her signature.
There have been others who impressed the management with their claims to fame, one of them left quietly after crossing swords with a long established member who was top poster for a long time. This poster claimed to be a debt specialist or something to that effect. On his profile, he claimed to be an insolvency practitioner specialising in bankruptcy. Unsurprisingly, he often posted that bankruptcy was the best solution, something that went against the whole ethos of the site, which was to try and help people avoid such drastic courses of action as much as possible.
There is, as one commentator pointed out, a relatively new member who claims to have 40 years experience as a debt advisor and the Beagles have taken his claims at face value, despite the fact that a number of members (now all banned by the way), have pointed out big holes in his tales. There were a number of posts scattered round the site earlier this year, many of which got removed, questioning his credentials and asking direct questions such as, if he really is a debt advisor, is he licensed?
One would expect such a question to be asked, after all, giving debt advice is a regulated activity according to the FCA. One thing is to post up on a public forum, however, this guy is always boasting about all the cases he handles privately. Surely if he was licensed, he should say so in his signature, even if he doesn’t publicly display his real name or license reference, these details should have been provided to the Site Team who could then say he is, in fact, a verified debt advisor.
As it stands, he is treated as if he was an authority and left to roam free, despite the fact the site team know he is a reject who got booted out from another site for various reasons. In fact, more than one Banned Beagle claims to have been responsible for his demise from the other site and it’s all to do with the quality and accuracy of his advice and the veracity of his statements rather than any personal issues. On Legal Beagles, he often provided completely the wrong answer, but that’s a subject for another day and another post, this one: Their Nemesis.