The Sidebar

bobstro

02:48

For the record, the site that I later added was not the original. When requested, I went searching for a mainstream media reference which happened to contain the video.

I am hesitant to edit my original response, although apparently it's custom for moderators here to hack another person's post without comment. I'd like to clarify the "am I free to go" comment. Is that OK?

As to borderline-political, I found the "but he had THC in his system" comment in meta to be the same. Where is it OK?

jimsug

@bobstro If you need to make edits to the answer to improve it, then you can, and should.

bobstro

Thanks. Would've appreciated the opportunity to do so rather than have someone else tailor it to suit their sensibilities. Something to consider when trying to encourage participation.

jimsug

@bobstro Certainly, I'm sure @feetwet would be happy to address any concerns you have with this.

I am very wary of editing other's peoples posts; I haven't had to yet, and don't foresee many situations where I would have to.

For the concerns that you raised re: attribution.

bobstro

Happy to point anybody to original site, but don't want to promote it here. Pretty much a horrorshow of current law enforcement. I'm not trying to be evasive.

jimsug

Of course, with actual posts as opposed to comments, the history is very clear and shows who has edited your post.

@bobstro No, I understand. It's just that anecdotal evidence (which is what a story without references is) is a very weak answer in and of itself.

And I completely understand and sympathise with your desire not to have people hurt themselves based on our information. But this is the internet.

We can't hold everyone's hands on every part of our site, and as I said in my comment, our answers need to contain legal information because, well, we're Law Stack Exchange.

bobstro

03:02

I agree it's a turd. Wanted to get it out there but didn't have a lot of time.

jimsug

If they wanted general information on what is right, wrong, and common sense, they can use Yahoo Answers or Twitter or something.

The fact that it is Law Stack Exchange means that we have domain over lots of everyday things.

bobstro

Well... where in the meta about this group would you know that? What would indicate to a potential visitor to a locale that answers here aren't necessarily indicative of safe or healthy behaviors?

jimsug

@bobstro You're welcome to include it in your post, but it shouldn't be the main thrust of your answer unless it in fact answers the question directly.

Eg if the OP had asked "are there examples of law enforcement apparently using excessive force"

Then it would probably be fine to just answer with the story that you did.

bobstro

Well, to paraphrase you if I may: The main problem is that people tend to act according to their interpretation of legality, even if it defies common sense.

jimsug

Well, people tend to do things that I wouldn't try to explain so simply.

Some people will do things in accordance with common sense, even if they don't have to.

bobstro

03:05

My point was that not cooperating, even if legal, can result in rapid and potentially deadly escallation.

You must not watch much YouTube. :)

jimsug

@bobstro Yep, that's fine. if that was your entire point, then you can add it as a comment to an existing answer, since it doesn't really answer the question that was posed.

bobstro

So... the focus here is really about splitting hairs, not practical applicability of law? "Lawyering" if you will?

jimsug

@bobstro I suggest you stop trying to misquote me.

The focus here is on law.

Are some things legal, but not safe? Sure.

Skydiving is legal in most places, within certain regulations.

Is it safe? Maybe, maybe not.

Should every question about skydiving come with "oh, and here's a story about a horrific skydiving accident?"

Driving is legal, is it safe?

bobstro

I'm not misquoting,other than paraphrasing your line to make a point.

I think there's a world of common-sensical difference between base jumping and running from armed humans. Is it not appropriate to point that out?

jimsug

@bobstro I don't know, I'm paraphrasing your general idea that you "don't want people to injure themselves"

If I go too far, I'm sorry. But in the end:

This is the internet.

This is a focussed section of the internet.

There's no shortage of websites containing warnings about how law enforcement abuse their power.

There's no shortage of websites proclaiming commonsense should prevail over everything else.

bobstro

03:11

I'll admit to being upset about the topic. I took the topic here as focused on the practical aspects of law in everyday life.

jimsug

I don't think it's our job to make sure that there is a 0% chance that anyone reading our site will get injured based on the content.

There are many questions that address the practical aspects of law in everyday life

bobstro

In my defense, I'm not seeing a lot here proclaiming such, but OK.

jimsug

9

A: Is it legal to be detained by a private rail or bus company for not having a valid ticket?

I'm not a lawyer; I'm not your lawyer. In this case, if you don't have a valid ticket (or refuse to produce one), and don't provide your name and address, the officer of a railway company may detain you1 (my emphasis): If a passenger having failed either to produce, or if requested to delive...

bobstro

I wasn't trying to ensure anything. Just pointing out that things don't happen in isolation.

jimsug

This is practical, no?

Or is that still too abstract? This is a direct application of law to a set of circumstances.

Which millions of people in England and Wales may be subject to every day.

3

Q: Big corporation in the UK, Intellectual Property and a Contract

I've recently been offered a job at a large technology corporation based in the UK. I've yet to sign the contract but I found something in it which concerns me. Intellectual property, ideas and inventions Any Ideas or Inventions you have or make or any Materials that you create or devel...

This is a question about the applicability of employment contract to the production of intellectual property.

Most people in salaried roles will have signed something like this, and so this question applies to them.

Am I misunderstanding your point re: practical applicability of the law?

bobstro

03:14

So it's pretty clear what you and the select mods want it to be. To be honest, I wouldn't have bother if I'd noticed as much written down anywhere.

jimsug

@bobstro What is "it"?

bobstro

Specific and limited to the bounds of the question with little or no tolerance for other discussion. I find that on other SE sites, so nothing new.

jimsug

@bobstro Do you mean that we want our answers to answer the question that was asked, within the scope of the site? Sure. That's true.

bobstro

No big deal. At this point, I'm having fun watching the up/down voting more than anything.

Interesting to catch the vibe that way.

I'll dump out in a day or so. Thanks.

Good luck on the beta.

jimsug

@bobstro law.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer

> **Answer the question**
Read the question carefully. What, specifically, is the question asking for? Make sure your answer provides that – or a viable alternative. The answer can be “don’t do that”, but it should also include “try this instead”. Any answer that gets the asker going in the right direction is helpful, but do try to mention any limitations, assumptions or simplifications in your answer. Brevity is acceptable, but fuller explanations are better.

@bobstro law.stackexchange.com/tour

> With your help, we're working together to build a library of detailed answers to every question about law.

@bobstro If you're ever unsure about what's appropriate for a site, you could, perhaps, ask in the meta site first, and then post. But that's your prerogative.

@bobstro Thanks. If you do have questions about law, or answers with legal information, please feel free to contribute.

feetwet

14:22

@bobstro It's infrequent that I rework someone's post to the degree that I did yours. In this case I did it urgently in an attempt to salvage it before it got flagged and downvoted into oblivion: it was drawing a lot of negative attention from the community.

@bobstro Also, your original answer was really so far from something that could have survived that I thought it would be better to just show you how it could be written to reasonably conform to the community standards. Now, it's still your answer so you should feel free to edit it as you see fit -- especially now that you've had this crash course in Law.SE ;)

Our goal is to maximize participation and quality with as light a touch as possible.

As a more experienced user (not a mod) I heavily edit questions and answers by new users that would probably be closed if I don't. When they are reasonably close but need help I try to coach through comments.

bobstro

16:29

@feetwet: I am not making a case for my answer being of high quality. Had you suggested improvements (and I understood such late revisions were OK) I'd have happily fixed it. I am not a child and can take creative criticism.

@all: I do find it interesting that the best moderation happens on groups like D&D. Those stereotypically socially awkward gamers do a good job of back and forth, with a downvote usually providing comments for improvements, fixes made, and downvotes removed. They don't lead in with the vehemence and threats of removal. Lessons to be learned perhaps?

I do find it interesting that this baby with no odd of survival went through the night oscillating between -1 and 1 upvotes (would love to see the hourly tally) and currently sits at +3. Perhaps this is a learning moment regarding what your audience thinks -- useful for a group in beta.

In any case, I've put in a request to have my account deleted (can't do it myself since I've voted) and it should all disappear soon enough.

nomen agentis

18:46

So far, the voting on this site isn't a sure-enough signal of answer quality. I'm not surprised that bobstro's answer has several up-votes.

I expect as this site gains legal experts that the voting pattern will more accurately reflect answer quality.

bobstro

Without killing off the weak ones, exactly. It is interesting to watch. I certainly didn't expect to gain 79 points off my initial post.

nomen agentis

Without killing off the weak ones, exactly. - what?

bobstro

Let the voting take care of it. If it's a turd, it'll sink. If it doesn't, perhaps there's something to it. No need for moderators or crusaders to make that decision for the audience.

nomen agentis

"If it doesn't, perhaps there's something to it" - no, that can't be inferred at this early stage. the votes right now are not necessarily reflective of answer quality.

it's completely acceptable for the community and moderators (i don't know what crusaders are) to create minimum standards for answers... like actually answering the question

bobstro

Uhm... exactly. Thus my suggestion to give it more time. It's not a problem that needs to be "fixed" by anything other than the proven SE system. Had the initial responses not been so aggressive, I'd try to improve the answer.

nomen agentis

18:59

moderators are part of the proven SE system.

bobstro

I never said it could be proven at this early stage. Seriously, do whatever you want. I no longer care. I am just letting you know that your administration could use a bit of improvement as well if your intent is to develop and expand your community. Aggressive initial responses reek of elitism and an established hierarchy to which newcomers need not apply.

But hey, they'll know who's in charge.

nomen agentis

19:19

I think it's completely reasonable to ask that the question be answered on a question and answer site. People that understand that is the type of community we want.

bobstro

19:32

Had that point been made in a reasonable tone, I would have made edits. I did actually make several edits. I'm not here to beg forgiveness. I'm doing you the favor of letting your know that your community is not as welcoming as the meta discussion indicated it should be.

By the way, I happily upvoted the superior answer.

HDE 226868

21:59

Question #500:

2

Q: What statutes constrain an insurance provider's treatment of suicide?

Many insurance companies have explicit suicide clauses: exclusions that allow the company to deny benefits to the policy holder's estate. Essentially, suicide voids the benefits policy. What statutes (if any) govern an insurance company's actions in this arena? That is, do any statutes prohibi...

common-law insurance end-of-life

jimsug

Yaaay...?

santiago

hi

jimsug

@santiago Welcome!

It's nice to see a new face in here

HDE 226868

@santiago Hi there!

santiago

how is everyone?

HDE 226868

22:06

Tired.

santiago

tired?

jimsug

Actually, yeah, a little.

HDE 226868

I've been working at a nature camp for kids. Long days.

Fun, though. Certainly for them.

santiago

ah yes, that'd do it!

I am still rehabilitating from a nasty accident a while ago

so, what is happening on Law.SE?

jimsug

22

Q: Is it illegal to run away from a police officer in a way that provokes them?

So I know this is very silly and obviously hypothetical, but I've wondered about it for a while. Let's say you aren't doing anything (else) illegal, you don't have anything illegal on you, and you don't have any warrants for your arrest or anything. And let's say we're talking about this occurri...

united-states police freedom-of-speech

@santiago This question is still hot.

HDE 226868

22:15

Three Notable Question badges awarded in the past few days - the first three ever on Law.

santiago

nice!

jimsug

@HDE226868 Mmm, yes. I like this. A good sign.

It's good to see that Law is of general interest to the rest of the network

HDE 226868

It's an excellent sign.

santiago

law is indeed a fascinating subject

HDE 226868

Did I really just create the homicide tag? How have we not had it before?

santiago

22:20

I have a strange law question

HDE 226868

Fire away.

santiago

What are the laws pertaining to the use of personalised experimental jetpacks in Australia, US

using the jetpack flight in Dubai as an example

extremetech.com/extreme/… - would this kind of flight be legal over the cities in Australia?

would that be a viable question?

did I just scare them away? (or did they fly away on their jetpacks?)

HDE 226868

It seems like an interesting question.

santiago

I'll post it and see how it goes

done

@jimsug do you think my question is suitable?

jimsug

22:47

@santiago Yeah, looks good. If I have time later today I'll see if I can write up an answer to it, if it hasn't already got a good one.

Feeds

jimsug has made a change to the feeds posted into this room

santiago

I would love to fly one of those things

jimsug

@StackExchange This is a new question ticker, it'll appear in the top-right of the chat screen when a new question is posted on main.

santiago

woot!

HDE 226868

What do people think about this?

2

Q: How common is it for bills to be introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate?

Five bills are mentioned in this report. Two of them, H.R. 2422 and S. 829, are very similar and appear to be applicable to the same situations (though I can not find the full text of the latter), with the only difference being that the former was introduced in the House of Representatives, and t...

united-states us-senate bills us-house-of-reps

santiago

22:53

looks good to me - but I am not well versed

@HDE226868 I posted my jetpack question

I would love to fly one of them

HDE 226868

@Santiago I saw it.

santiago

@HDE226868 you would like to fly one, eh?

HDE 226868

@Santiago Not. At. All.

santiago

wouldn't it spectacular to fly over Mars in one of them

@HDE226868 heights?

HDE 226868

@Santiago No, it's just not really my thing.

santiago

23:02

imagine it though, no airline queues...

no screaming toddlers

I wonder if that kind of thing would become the basis of personalised transport in the future

jimsug

23:18

It would probably lead to a change in the behaviour of birds.

santiago

true!

HDE 226868

Possibly a change in the number of birds, too.

santiago

very true

i got an answer.... well, it seems to be a part answer, but interesting nonetheless

jimsug

@DaleM is one of our more prolific answerers.

He has earned the bulk of his reputation this month.

santiago

i have upvoted the answer - the links are valuable

i probably should look at answering some questions too

hmmm

just how enforceable is international law within a country?

jimsug

23:28

usually, only insofar as it has been ratified by that country and enacted as law.

santiago

and I assume, unenforceable to a great extent in countries that have not ratified them?

on a different plane of thought - it is interesting how different sites vote

I'd imagine that US based law questions would get more attention/votes than for other countries

my question was stupid wasn't it?

jimsug

23:43

@HDE226868 law.stackexchange.com/questions/1337/…

Do you think that's close enough to the suggested dup?

HDE 226868

@jimsug I do.

jimsug

@HDE226868 I guess that was a bit of a silly question, you wouldn't have voted to close otherwise.

Hmm. I wonder whether different laws govern audio recording than do video recording, though?

HDE 226868

Interesting.

jimsug

ie maybe I can take a photo of you, and maybe I can record video of you, but can I actually playback the sound on that video?

I think I recall something in Australian law about this... hmm.

santiago

would it be okay or terrible to slightly modify my question to include US cities?

@jimsug?

jimsug

23:54

@santiago shrugs you're probably going to get very different responses.

santiago

to be honest, I find the answer almost dismissive

nevermind, I'll figure something out

sorry to have been a bother :)

Transcript for