2

There has been a slew of questions about Nevada which seem to all be from the same person, despite using multiple accounts. The questions seem to be revolving around a neighbor dispute. The story as I can piece it together is:

OP and someone else bought a car together. The other person somehow removed OP from the title. Now OP wants vengeance.

Is it damages to cause someone's premiums to increase?

Castle doctrine

Hypothetical terrorism

Can you sue if someone uses drugs in your car?

Is it actually possible to go to jail for jamming?

Stealing shared title

When does trepassing warning expire?

How do I collect on a judgement against a debtor who only deals in cash?

Pulling debtor credit report without SSN

Definition of grand theft auto

Is it illegal to steal someone's illegal drugs?

How do i obtain a ssn against someone i have a judgement against?

Most of their questions have been of fairly low quality, if not outright asking for advice on how to best break the law. I'm wondering what can be done to curtail this behavior?

4
  • Flag for moderator, hope that someone sees it before it ages out.
    – user4657
    Mar 3, 2020 at 3:54
  • 1
    Flag it as what?
    – Luck
    Mar 3, 2020 at 15:53
  • "Flag for moderator..."
    – user4657
    Mar 4, 2020 at 0:57
  • The weirdest thing, and I assume the thread connecting these, is that (at least before I got to edit some of them) all of these bore the solitary and irrelevant tag "nevada." If nothing else these questions warranted tag edits!
    – feetwet Mod
    Mar 4, 2020 at 2:05

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

The prior question that has to be addressed is whether this behavior should be curtailed. Supposing that you are right that there is some neighbor dispute and a user asks a series of questions that in fact are designed to get revenge on the other party, I don't see that at an institutional level this should be addressed. SE doesn't presuppose a moral code where questions must be motivated by a good intent, however defined. Each question has to be judged on its own merit. I haven't read all of the questions, but I don't agree with the assessment "fairly low quality", using the mass of questions that we get as the standard of comparison. Not great questions, but generally coherent and not buried in a mountain of non-essential detail of the circumstances. If you don't like a question, and especially if there is a good reason to, you can down-vote it (add a comment explaining what the problem is, so that your down-vote isn't just another ideological downvote).

1

Judge each question on its merits

If what you think is going on is in fact going on (and it probably is) it's weird but it doesn't contravene our code of conduct or expected behavior so just treat each question as stand-alone and deal with it as you see fit.

If someone asks "is robbing banks illegal?" the correct response is "Yes" but it's not wrong to add "Please don't rob banks."

1
  • Surely a question asking "is robbing banks illegal" would be closed as "lack of basic research"? Which can also sum up most of the mentioned questions tbh.
    – user28517
    Mar 10, 2020 at 19:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .