Commentary by Jeff Worrell

It seems a little simplistic to wag my finger about not blasting a restaurant online because your water glass did not get refilled, and then in the spirit of public advocacy encourage a consumer to sound the alarm about a mold remediator doing harm to our community. What is the difference between warning versus vengeance in the name of civility?

When considering whether to use your influence to warn others about a fraudulent contractor, it’s essential to reflect on the motivation behind the public rebuke and the potential impact of your actions. Warning others about bad actors can be seen as a civic duty. By sharing your experience, you help protect potential victims from falling into the same detrimental situation.

Sharing your knowledge with a community can be justified if you stick to the facts and avoid defamatory statements. Fortunately, this action aligns with intent to inform rather than seek revenge.

But you must consider how your warning will be received. If your intent is to genuinely inform and protect others, it is likely to be viewed as a civil action. However, if your warning is fueled by anger or a desire for retribution, it may come across as vengeful. The key is to focus on factual information and constructive advice, such as how to identify fraudulent contractors and what steps to take if one encounters such a situation.

Yes, a desire to warn others can be a civil act if approached with the right mindset and intentions. If your focus is to provide helpful information and resources to empower others, you will contribute to a culture of civility in a responsible manner.