Hardly a long life as a Beagle, was it? I was there for three years and, unlike yourself, didn't get banned over anything I posted. The Beagles had their own agenda and didn't like people recommending solicitors, only shortly after that, they set up their own solicitor comparison site.stopbailiff wrote: I was offering my opinion for 9 months on Legalbeagles, er because I possess a wide knowledge.
Anybody who plays along with the Mad Dogs is allowed to offer their opinion for as long as they want, and the Beagles themselves don't possess a wide knowledge, so they wouldn't know any better, how would they? Not until someone who does possess a wider knowledge came along. That's when you got banned.
Actually, it was the Beagles who banned you, not us. Isn't that an indication that we are, perhaps, a bit more open than them?stopbailiff wrote:Ban him! both you and Jason say when I say something a little challenging for your conventional thinking brains.
There we go again.stopbailiff wrote:I have studied far more law formally than any you have.
The word is "hierarchical". You claim to understand a word you're not even familiar with.stopbailiff wrote: Yet you say ban me! Not one of you understand that statute has an hierarchal order
Yes, we do understand the general picture, however, this is a practical help site, not a legal discussion forum. When people have a bailiff at the door and a crying baby inside, they are, somehow, less inclined to read about all those challenging concepts, so we don't post them up on their threads.stopbailiff wrote:and some statutes have more priority ie constitutional acts (inter alia TCEA 2007 being no exception), and constitutional common law, not that any of you will remotely understand these 'challenging concepts.'