So, you don't want your comment removed? Guidance on how to write good comments on LAUK.

PinnedMeta

Approaching nearly 300,000 users, our community has more people than Belfast or Southampton. As a result, we get around 1,000 comments each day, and last month we removed over 3,000 comments.

These comment removals vary - a lot of the removals are carried out by automod (51%), the and rest removed after human intervention. We rely on the amount of helpful reports from our user base, so please keep reporting comments.

We know that not everyone is going to read this, but we wanted to provide interested new joiners to the subreddit some information about how to avoid getting your comments removed and navigate the moderation team.


###General Rules

  • AutoMod removes comments from new accounts
  • AutoMod removes comments from low karma accounts

Sometimes these are reviewed and approved, but not often.


###Comment Length -

Contrary to popular belief, or whatever my mum told me, longer is broadly better.

  • AutoMod will remove top-level comments less than 100 characters in length
  • AutoMod will remove comments that only say "this", "I agree", or similar, that have less than 20 characters

This means that when you leave any comment, it should contain at least a sentence or two worth of analysis, explanation, or practical direction. Short comments are almost never approved or reviewed.


###Unhelpful, Off-Topic, or Not-Legal Advice

We expect all comments to -

  1. Be helpful to the needs of the poster; AND
  2. Be relevant to the topic and discussion; AND
  3. Contain mostly direct legal explanation, legal commentary, or practical instruction

As a general rule, if your comment does not meet these three criteria, it is at risk of being removed.

As is tradition, there are exceptions to these three criteria.

  • At least 60% of your comment should be focused on what the law is; there is some light wiggle room for non-controversial casual comments or opinion in addition to an otherwise helpful comment to OP.
  • Your own experiences can be acceptable, where you tell an OP what you practically did to resolve a situation - just saying "I spoke to my manager about it and they changed it" isn't practical advice; what did you say? did you speak face to face or in an e-mail? Did you provide any supporting documents or evidence? Tell OP what they need to know to fix the situation themselves.
  • Sometimes OP doesn't need only any legal direction, and in that event, you can refer OP to a more helpful service (e.g., refer them to their GP, with an explanation).
  • A comment which only says something such as "Speak to ACAS" or "Speak to Shelter" or "Get a Solicitor" is helpful because it sign-posts a user to get more professional assistance, but it is not legally helpful as it does not contain any helpful commentary or explanation for the situation OP finds themselves in. These will just get removed in nearly every eventually, except for very niche topics where very specialist advice is needed.
  • Casual related discussion in the comment section can be okay; for example, another user may want to ask a follow-up question or add some general, non-controversial commentary - this is okay as long as it stays broadly on-topic. Replies to OP should always meet the main three comment criteria, however.
  • You don't HAVE to comment - if you're not sure what the right thing to do or say is from a legal perspective, just don't comment. "I think the law is.." is not going to be considered helpful. What you think the law should be, rather than what the law actually is, it also not going to be helpful.
  • We will remove comments which only contain gestures of best wishes, or sympathy; it is unfortunate, but OPs are here for more than that.

###Comments Moderated Threads

  • Automod will set the flair automatically (based on keywords) to "Comments Moderated"
  • Sometimes mods will manually set the flair to "Comments Moderated"
  • Nearly all comments in that thread are automatically removed until a mod can manually review them
  • Extra attention is given to the quality and helpfulness of comments in the thread
  • Rule breaking comments left in these threads are significantly more likely to result in a ban

The mods, of course, reserve the right to exercise their judgment and discretion.

These are just meant to be helpful guidelines for regularly community members.

Ultimately, our main focus is on making sure OPs get actually useful help when they come to us, and as long are you primarily helpful within the scope of the subreddit, you'll likely be okay. If you're even in doubt about if you can or should leave a particular comment, just message the mods and ask - we're often occasionally very a bit friendly tolerable.

Questions, comments, feedback, etc welcome below.

Posted Jul 27, 2021, 12:00 PM UTC

187117
JebusKristi•

You don't HAVE to comment

Mind=blown.

39
Sad_Channel_9706•

If it’s on my feed then it’s directed to me, it would be rude not to reply surely?

19
RexLegeMODFlairless, The king of no flair. •

Not gonna lie. I laughed out loud at this, considering how often I’ve replied to you recently.

16
JebusKristi•

Sometimes, I need telling.

.

7
Dwaynedouglasv1•

Sometimes I just need the attention.

7
MotoSeamusMODAsk me about mince pies•

This.

32
linuxrogueMODI <3 Mumsnet•

Or post at 5am so linuxrogue checks your comment in the modqueue and approves it because she's far too forgiving...

27
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

2
RexLegeMODFlairless, The king of no flair. •

Go see a solicitor.

21
Rawrbear89•

I'd suggest that you withhold rent

26
AutoModeratorMOD•

Your comment contains keywords which suggests you are asking or advising about withholding rent.

You should never withhold rent, entirely or in part, in response to disrepair or inaction on the part of your landlord. Withholding rent either entirely or in part may lead to you being evicted, since regardless of any inaction on your landlord's part, you will still owe rent and the landlord is not obliged to offer any kind of reduction.

You also do not have the right to pay for repairs yourself out of pocket and then deduct the cost from future rent payments, without following a proper legal process first, including serving formal notice on your landlord and escalating to your local authority.

Please see our FAQ section on disrepair in private tenancies for the process to follow and details on the very few circumstances in which a limited deduction from rent may be acceptable.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

21
MotoSeamusMODAsk me about mince pies•

Shit mod

15
[deleted]•

[deleted]

18
Sad_Channel_9706•

I agree

12
Rawrbear89•

You have my sympathy

13
AutoModeratorMOD•

It looks like you or OP may want to find a Solicitor!

There is a detailed guide in our FAQ about how to do this.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

8
RexLegeMODFlairless, The king of no flair. •

Good boy automod.

12
beefygravy•

YOU go see a solicitor

5
AutoModeratorMOD•

It looks like you or OP may want to find a Solicitor!

There is a detailed guide in our FAQ about how to do this.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

5
[deleted]•

[removed]

0
[deleted]•

[removed]

0
bulletproof_alibi•

AutoMod will remove top-level comments less than 100 characters in length.

Huh, I didn't know this one. That will certainly help restrain my temptation to reply with just "No" and a facepalm emoji to the next idiotic Covid post.

18
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

Also any comment with an emoji gets flagged for mod review.

18
bulletproof_alibi•

😭

21
SmokingMonkeysNever posting here again...•

😡🖕

19
my_ass_cough_sky•

😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣💯💯💯👌👌👌

11
SmokingMonkeysNever posting here again...•

What swear words are acceptable?

In my objective opinion, all of my uses of profanity are entirely justified and proportionate. They are either in direct response to someone else’s offensive language (or equally offensive stupidity), or are part of a measured pre-emotive strike.

Asking for me, because I don’t have any friends to place responsibility on.

17
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

For people who have a history of providing good and helpful advice, as long as the overall comment is at least 60% legal advice, and the swear words are reasonable and proportional to the issue at hand, I personally would be inclined to overlook it.

13
SmokingMonkeysNever posting here again...•

For people with a history of giving good and helpful advice…

Shit.

50
[deleted]•

[deleted]

15
hdhxuxufxufufiffif•

Another exception to the three criteria that I know you allow: asking relevant clarifying questions. Too often the OP, quite understandably because they're posting from a position of not knowing, leaves out pertinent information and it's impossible to give a good answer without finding out more. The classic example being HOW LONG HAVE YOU WORKED THERE.

14
RexLegeMODFlairless, The king of no flair. •

But how long have you worked here?

I agree though and we wouldn’t remove comments like that. Extra info is helpful, usually.

5
hdhxuxufxufufiffif•

1 year and 364 days ... gah!!!

1
edent•

As I've said before, comments without a link (or easy to use citation) often border on useless.

I'm not saying every comment needs a link. But any which go "the law says" or "Citizens Advice reckons" - probably ought to be backed up with something reputable. Otherwise it's as useful as "my sister's mum's dog's walker's cousin told me…"

Also - what's the law on importing a big sword and carrying it around for self defense?

13
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

We did have a script for about a day that removed comments which didn't contain a citation or source, and it was just a nightmare, but the mods do remove and sometimes ban people who refuse to cite sources when asked, or argue in bad faith.

7
anorwichfan•

Bit of a meta chat, but is there, or should there be a flair or format for follow-up posts of solved advice? Quite often they are useful posts

11
litigant-in-personOP•

You can search by flair for "update" posts :-)

6
Rawrbear89•

I agree with this post OP

;)

10
silverbuilt•

You guys are the definition of control freaks.

Jobsworth scum.

10
deafweldBig Stewie•

T H I S

God, I can just picture them all being abusive partners who browbeat people to death and trawl the internet all day looking for cunts to disagree with.

They’d be the absolute worstcunts, going about calling folk bootlickers and fucking cucks KEK etc.

Absolute fucking pathetic cretinous pricks.

<checks your post history>

Oh, ffs. Nevermind.

16
SmokingMonkeysNever posting here again...•

🎶

This is how it feels to be lonely,

This is how it feels to be small,

This is how it feels when your worth means nothing at all

🎶

😂

5
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

Jobsworth

God, we don't even get paid, we're just scum.

12
LAUK_In_The_NorthMOD•

And I've even been professional scum.

9
jimicus•

I take issue with this one:

if you're not sure what the right thing to do or say is from a legal perspective, just don't comment. "I think the law is.." is not going to be considered helpful. What you think the law should be, rather than what the law actually is, it also not going to be helpful.

The way I read that, a comment that is factually incorrect but given with absolute confidence may stay; a comment that is factually correct but not given with confidence may not.

One of those comments might give OP confidence to go in guns-a-blazing; one might give them thought and point them in a general direction.

9
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

The way I read that, a comment that is factually incorrect but given with absolute confidence may stay; a comment that is factually correct but not given with confidence may not.

It's more about making sure people know it's okay to not guess at the answers, or make things up based on what they think the law should be; such as "This doesn't sound right at all, surely your boss can't just sack you without notice? You should speak to a Solicitor" sort of comments.

14
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
amyjallen•

I never know what is allowed here. I’ve sometimes commented where a person is asking for advice about a complex situation and people are focussing on what one part of the law says about one part, I can’t even think of an example, and I’ve suggested that there may be the possibility of another law being broken, but asked someone with more knowledge to clarify that. It’s probably not allowed in the rules, but it may be something the OP hasn’t considered and something the other commenters have overlooked.

2
[deleted]•

[removed]

1
bulletproof_alibi•

It seems that any reply from an OP is now locked. Is that deliberate and is there a new rule somewhere I should be aware of lest I incur the wrath of a capricious mod?

7
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

It seems that any reply from an OP is now locked

What do you mean? If you're on mobile, it may be a reddit bug

7
bulletproof_alibi•

it may be a reddit bug

Ah, yes, that's what it is. Just tried on desktop and it's fine.

Thanks.

8
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

Feel free to reply to the admin in that thread with a link to what you see on mobile :)

4

One non law related comment is enough to get you banned and a polite reasoned appeal is enough to get you muted from contacting the mods for 28 days.

You need an appeals process for low level first time one off offences that breach your rules.

You’re coming down too hard on people that want to help others and have experience and knowledge of the law that would be incredibly useful to this forum.

5
for_shaaameMODSerjeant Vanilla•

We have an appeals process - message the modmail. Your appeal was unsuccessful. And it looks like you’ve created another account to get around your ban?

5
MotoSeamusAsk me about mince pies•

Uh oh - Serjeant Vanilla is coming for you....

5
deafweldBig Stewie•

The ban is a slap on the wrist because clicking the ban button is infinitely quicker than messaging back and forth to explain the rules in dum-dum terms to every. single. person. who doesn’t quite get it.

Getting muted for whinging about being banned serves a very, very similar purpose.

Remember, those mods aren’t getting paid. Which means they’re even less inclined to spend all day explaining why Go To ThE PApErs!!! is a ban-worthy comment and as per EqA2010 your complaint isn’t technically harassment, though I understand how you feel isn’t ban-worthy.

5
skellious•

I generally think the moderation on this sub is appropriate, well-reasoned and largely fair and unbiased.

However, although I agree it breaks the current rules, I don't see why there should not be some exception for humour and jokes when they are 10 levels deep in a thread.

I realise it would be hard to know where to strike the balance but especially with lighter topics I feel that they can add to the discussion. Legal professionals are humans too.

I know you are unlikely to change this rule but since this is the one time I can actually talk about it I hope you'll allow me to do so.

4
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

don't see why there should not be some exception for humour and jokes when they are 10 levels deep in a thread.

There is a little space for it - it's included mildly in the bullet points here, as long as its broadly on-topic and not too controversial, we'll be minded to look over it :-)

6
skellious•

Thanks for the reply :)

2
[deleted]•

[deleted]

2
skellious•

yeah, that's fair.

1
OneCatch•

Wanted to ask; it seems that posts are getting locked a lot more quickly these days, usually once OP has had a couple of bits of advice.
Is that intended to strike a balance between OP getting answers, and threads staying open longer than necessary and becoming a moderation burden? And out of interest how do you decide whether OP has had sufficient advice?

4
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

Yes, we've been doing a bit of an experiment by locking threads when a broad range of advice has been given and the thread reaches a certain threshold of interest/activity.

I think broadly we find that the first 20 comments can be helpful, but after that it's either repetitive or people leaving off-topic comments, which just increases the mods workload.

4
OneCatch•

Makes sense! Thanks for replying.

3
[deleted]•

[removed]

0
[deleted]•

[deleted]

4
litigant-in-personOPMOD•

will we ever hear the truth that OfficePlum fought for?

LAUK has prevailed despite the attempts of the OfficePlum.

Will u/slippyg ever admit taking the bribes from the police?

Honestly, I know Slip doesn't take bribes, because we know that he would if he could, but still drives in Nissan Micra from 2001. Nobody who takes bribes could have such a low quality of life as Slippy does.

6
ARabidMeerkat•

Can we edit our own flair to reflect which areas of experience we have? This could be helpful for OP/other readers to gauge perspectives (for example, Education, HR, Retail etc)

3
MotoSeamusMODAsk me about mince pies•

That wouldn't really make sense. If we allowed users to edit their own flairs, they could put whatever they wanted. We don't operate a system of verification. It would be meaningless to anyone and would potentially give OP's an overconfidence in some questionable advice which gets posted.

Some long term users get flairs because we recognise their long term contribution and, sometimes, because they are very very sassy like u/SmokingMonkeys

16
SmokingMonkeysNever posting here again...•

My flair was based on my description of another Redditor…

Given some of the terms I have used (and had 3 days on the naughty step for), I think I got away lightly.

🤣

6
ARabidMeerkat•

and would potentially give OP's an overconfidence in some questionable advice which gets posted.

The last thing I want to do is to turn someone into Colonel Custer!

I know in other threads that I'm part of, such as r/teachers, it has been very useful (since people know what ages/ability levels we teach and can share experiences and expertise) but after reading your comment it make sense not to have that here.

Edit: Autocorrect

5
Dangerous-24-7•

I would say the MODS here aren’t lawyers. They claim to not accept posts that don’t contain legal advice but then accept numerous posts from people saying they are not lawyers and issue half baked “legal advice”.

3†
Macrologia•

What point are you trying to make?

Some of the mods are lawyers, but we explicitly do not moderate bad legal advice. This is in the rules and in our FAQ. We remove things that don't purport to offer legal advice, but we don't moderate something that purports to be legal advice but is factually incorrect.

5
Dangerous-24-7•

The point is, how do you know if it is “bad” legal advice if you don’t know the law? Most of the so called legal advice here is half right, eg “what does the contract say”. Ok to a certain extent but no advice on implied terms, statutory overrides, penalty clauses etc. Leaves posters thinking they can only look at the contract for eg employment advice ie bad legal advice

0†
Macrologia•

The point is, how do you know if it is “bad” legal advice if you don’t know the law?

What do you think we should do? Just be experts on everything, and offer a quasi-guarantee that we're always right and we always remove everything incorrect?

4
Dangerous-24-7•

Nope. You are missing the point and getting defensive. What you are trying to do is great. But equal weight seems to be given to HR persons or barrack room lawyers that have watched Suits. Perhaps ask people to say what their position/experience is when they respond. I am not here for the upvotes or the validation, i just want to help people.

0†