1. Show both sides of the coin as politiolegal correct professment. For a Gender Researcher when ‘confronted’ each and every words of further repliers becomes “bulling” and /or “public forum abuse” and/or as a “personal attack” statement and it is a lame excuse to "end" a public platform debate hands up whereas all public replies were meant as a simple legal debate.
2. Absolutely.
3. Gender Researcher ever wondered why your started below message thread of 16 Sept. '10 with Title "Food for thought" which was put under Family Law Forum got deleted by Admin. / Partner of LCI Forum before it could be further scrutinized by 83+ K LCI members; since it contained one sided societal biasness and in Admin / Partner of LCI Forum wisdom it was rightly deleted before it becomes yet another issues between members after the last 3-4 months cold war between two sides of the coin wherein lots of members account were even deleted and some new faces popped up too from hibernation !
https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Re-Food-for-thought-24324.asp
4. Any member may put as many citations / judgment as may be allowed by Admin / Partner but don't start the citation with a biased "quote" as is objected to Prabhakar's this post title. His contributing Judgment of Mumbai HC is OK to the extent it could be used by any deserving party accordingly, but, to put a quote in start of the citation is objection from one of the public member here.