About Wikivorce

wikiteam
I am one of the many grateful but not too knowledgable users of this site.
I have found huge support and did wonder how it was free of any charge
I for one dont worry about adverts its not power selling and we have a choice
so what i am trying to say is whatever i hopetogod you stay and a nominal membership fee would not be objected to by me and adverts dont bother me.... we all watch telly which is funded by adverts as is sport etc..... so whats the difference
happy christmas and new year to you ian and i would volunteer to help but not with any technical stuff as useless but can do other things
looby

If I may be allowed to put in my tuppence worth, I entirely concur with my namessake that the costs of setting up and administering a site like this have to be paid from somewhere. So I don't take offence at the idea of solicitors advertising on the site, at least not in principle. And what is more, I think there could be benefits to users of the site ; the average divorce client may be meeting solicitors for the first time in his or her life, and many simply don't know whom to choose out of ten pages of advertisements in Yellow Pages.

But I believe that this site has a strong ethos that divorce is better dealt with through mediation, conciliation, collaboration, call it what you like, but you get my drift. Human nature being what it is, there will always be divorce cases which turn nasty, and there are always going to be cases which have to be fought through the Courts at a cost which all too often is quite out of proportion to the monetary sums involved. But I would like to see such cases being the exception, not the rule.

I know there are practising family law solicitors who also think this way, and some of them are regular posters on this site. We should be ( and are ) grateful that there are people who will find time to do this. My advice to posters seeking a solicitor is that they should seek out a member of Resolution or a collaborative law practicioner, or certainly a lawyer who does family law and nothing else. I don't suppose wikivorce could realistically turn away revenue ; but it is important, at the very least, to make it clear that advertising on the site is not a recommendation, and that clients should take as much care about choosing a lawyer as they would with any major financial transaction.

From the point of view of subscribers, I do what I do for a mixture of different reasons, but I suppose mainly that here I am, having some degree of specialised knowledge, though I have always made it clear I am not a divorce lawyer and never was. But I am very conscious of the costs of divorce and would like to help people who are bewildered and don't know where to turn. It helps to keep my brain active in retirement !

I see my role in wikivorce basically as a contributor of advice rather than the recipient, and while I am happy to do this, a charge for subscribers would worry me, and it might deter those on whom the site depends. I would no more want to pay than I would to pay for the privelege of working as a volunteer in a CAB ( and yes, I've done that too, as a volunteer and a manager ).

WikiTeam,
I have not been in the divorce game for very long but i do know a lot about the internet and understand that you Ian will have had to sacrifice a significant amount of time and money. If this site makes you a good living then i applaud you for getting this valuable resource off the ground and in to our homes. Those who feel cheated because of the advertising element then don't contribute. we all have a choice to come here or not. I really can't think of any other way i would have got the answers i needed without this resource. Well done Wiki !

Monster

My suggestion wasn't that there is any impropriety or Ian shouldn't be recompensed for his endeavours. Stating who owns a site, whether owned by an organisation or individual, where it's based and it's purpose validates the site. This is in the interest of everyone and might also prevent misunderstandings such as we have seen in the not so distant past.

Fiona,
My little spat was more about the idea that Wikivorce was doing sinister things in the background with big corporates and was in cahoots with solicitors looking for cherry picked clients.

I ALWAYS respect your views (Wouldn't dare not! ) and fully appreciate what you are saying. Misunderstandings can cause all kinds of fun, as anyone going through divorce really ought to know by now.

I guess as Ian says in his post, it started as a hobby which has, by it's huge success, been forced to make the transition into the commercial sector.

Long may it stay and long may the knowledgeable and supportive posters like your good self continue to give their valuable time to supporting the users.

Mike