Jonathon, the Vader thing was a bit unfortunate. Regarding the code of ethics and its relationship here, it's my understanding if someone is currently represented by an agent, and has thus established agency, if that person subsequently approaches me, asking me for my advice, I can in fact offer that advice. Because they approached me first, I'm not violating our code of ethics.

The trouble I find at Trulia Voices, often enough, is that I'm not supposed to solicit someone that is represented, yet how do I know if someone asking a question is represented? As well, could my response in any way be interpretted as a solication for their business (which is an ethics violation)? I think the answer to the latter is no, since the represented person opened up the possibility that an answer be considered a solicitation by asking the question.

On the subject of "firing your client/agent", both parties mutually agreed to enter into a listing or buyer broker agreement. Both parties can certainly mutually agree to terminate the agreement early. I fired a client last summer for the first time in my career, which my client agreed to. I've been fired as well, and while it wasn't fun, I personally won't fight it, even though I don't write anything explicitly in to my agreements.

Still, I did find this sequence of questions very annoying, primarily because it screamed, "I don't trust my agent, and I want some other opinions." I can understand the desire for more opinions, but just because the opinion comes from an online community, why would that be a better formed opinion than your trusted advisor that you are already working with?

This line of questioning does point out that many professionals are concerned about the code of ethics and how it relates to social networking sites. Are lines crossed unknowingly? Should we have more information about a person asking a question to better protect ourselves from a mistaken ethics violation?

Also, fyi, 2 of the questions asked by that Trulia Voices user were deleted.