33 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
As agents of CNet
.... we do not make public accusations.
It serves no useful purpose for it to be a topic which would disintegrate into charges and countercharges as it did in the past.
You have been a member for a long time, Clay, so I believe you are fully aware of the policy re: multiple accounts, re-registrations, aliases, and so forth.
The vast majority of people would not chose to violate the policy. But, as with so any other rules and laws which good citizens face and obey , there are always those who choose to thumb their noses at them as if they are above the rest of us. There have always been such a minority, and I suspect there always will be.
But is it a TOS violation.....
....for a non-moderator to "out" someone if it's blisteringly obvious who it is?
do you mean on forum or in email to mods?
But, I asked because...
All of the sudden we had numerous edvin-this-and-that and someone truncated that thread and got rid of the posts but we don't know if the MPDs are gone.
I also asked critic410 specifically if he/she was related to the member critic411 and my post was deleted without explanation and we still have members critic411 and critic410. Now what exactly would be the point in deleting my post? Is is a violation of the TOS to question the personas here that give the impression of being a member with multiple accounts?
MPDs seem to be one of the issues that has been hard to get addressed and dealt with here. As a long time member yourself I'm sure you remember when we were all members of ZDNet Speakeasy and everyone was required to use their real name. Alternate personas were not tolerated. Is it now OK for me to have personality 1, 2, 3 and 4? If not then why are others allowed?
use their real name.
Do you really think that IF John Brown is banned he can't come back as Jim Smith?
Both are REAL names.
This subject has been flogged to death
Are you saying....
That JohnEdvind2, Edvind2, Edvin11 and Edvin are all different people that just keep showing up and making 1 or 2 posts?
I think they are all different people
My query to critic410 was unexplainably deleted. I wonder why a mod wouldn't want me questioning someone that appears to be mocking your name.
Same reason some one was mocking
I agree with your idea
a group of people could use your ID and password. as long as their message and agenda is the same. it only requires you sharing your password.
that also provides an answer if someone thinks you are someone else. a reply stating you are not that person; would not be inaccurate at that particular moment.
thanks for the revealing tip.
I think one point is....
....that when someone is banned, it is not the account that is being banned. It is the person.
So if John Smith is banned and then comes back as Jim Smith, he's still a banned member and should have the new account disabled as soon as the identity of the account holder is determined. What is less clear is whether it is a TOS violation to address this banned member by their previous account name. A couple of weeks ago I did it to "jimandjerry" who was very obviously Mark5019, and he started crying "TOS! TOS!" Talk about irony, especially since he was usually one of the first to call others out on the same thing, and would then continue to do so repeatedly.
I notice he's not posting lately though....
You would think....
...that when someone is banned, it is not the account that is being banned. It is the person.
That doesn't seem to be the case around here though so it would be nice if someone would give us some more detail on the undetailed terms of service...
let me give you an example
if a "snow white" registered using the email address firstname.lastname@example.org and was banned for some reason, and then 3-4 hours later "peter pan" appeared using email@example.com, on what grounds would you ban "peter pan"? being a newbie? registering with a throw away address? using a fairy tale character as a user name?, appearing 3-4 hours after snow white was banned?
or because he/she carried on in exactly the same way that "snow white" did?
I'll go with #5
Do I win?
Just have Lee compare IP addresses....
The odds of you getting multiple drive bys here with different names but the same IP address are pretty slim....
That would work
IF you have a forum with 5 or 6 viewers.
I happen to know of one with 10,000 members...
it works pretty well with...
Not nearly as many as CNet.
There are so few that play
.... the game that we see here in SE that it is hardly worth a corporation's time.
It appears that the ones who complain about it are the ones who know the perpetrators well.
I see that we have now decided who the "perpetrators" are
and who they are not. Somehow, I think I know who is in what category, but perhaps not. The thing that is still a mystery is what went into that classification activity. I am gaining a new appreciation for the possibilities inherent in reality distortion fields.
Not "we", KP. "They".
This whole thing has been about CNet and the mods being unable to control the re-registrations.
But it was none of the about 2 dozen mods who started this thread or made the comments in another.
Well, it's not like the mods will take action anyhow
by C1ay - 3/20/08 3:52 PM
In reply to: No, it is NOT!!!! by Angeline Booher
Now you've done it, Angeline...
Oh my, now you've done it with "Woods-Hich ". I've seen a lot of posts about someone mis-spelling a poster's name implying some form of malice. Now you slipped. Does this mean that now you too will be called out for it?
I have 3 identities.
they are me, myself and I.
They all post under James Denison however.
I've noticed some strong similarities between (former?) members who no longer post and some new names who do, but mostly just ignore it. Why kick a skunk twice, isn't once enough?
Are you saying
I made 3 statements in my post and you're confused ?
I have been a flogger and a floggee
I am sure C1ay or Clay is familiar with how a 'new' member named: W00DS-HICK, WooDS-HICK and WOODS-H1CK suddenly appeared.
I know in another forum that many are familiar with C1ay or Clay suggested:
changing Dango517 to Dungo517. one of the administrators suggested it was not good to draw attention to their forum.
I know C1ay or Clay is an administrator in another forum that he requested permission to LINK here in SE. if one is an administrator they would know how to fudge the membership process. for example: C1ay.
the 'restructuring' of my name occurred around the time the "no religion/no politics" rule was put in place. it was also the time when many older members left to join another forum. the ones' with integrity kept their word and did not return to SE.
I was also the victim of the johnedvin2 mix-up. that is why a new member called 'whilieye' knew about it and used it in a reply to me. my educated guess is that person was also 'whillk'. it was pointed out that 'ilk' had only one 'l' by you. I see that person stopped posting soon after you mentioned it. I did notice that both names began with 'wh'; which has been used by certain members referring to me. it was so obvious who they were.
of course how would anyone know if the 'real name' was real. photo ID? DNA? "fingerprints" as one suggested.
and that is how I trapped critic411. when I saw him make a reply to who he thought was me: snap went the snare.
I also noticed how 'selective' Clay or C1ay was in the names he was curious about. he is an intelligent man and caught that mistake and added critic411 in another post. I could have helped with that task.
as I have been told by a few moderators: knowing and proving are separate issues. as long as a member does not violate the TOS in replying to other members, it is hard to ban or reveal anything further.
I know who the new members 'are' and reply accordingly. the only way to curtail their activity is to: DNR or play with their heads. knowledge is power.
so read this fast because it will disappear.
Not really selective....
Those names just happened to be the ones I noticed recently.
OTOH, I've personally only ever used one name here but did change my handle from Clay to C1ay when we were told that the member names were going to be made permanent. My real name is still in my profile here.
neither was I
how do you prove that you are who you say you are?
this will be a twofer:
first, by your own admission you know how forum software works. apparent by your "10000" reply to JP. I do not. I would consider that to be a handy skill (forum software knowledge).
second, mothers and fathers and sons and daughters and friends and other family members are allowed to join CNET. I know you are familiar with wolf packs. clans are cozier.
BTW: my sister and mother say, hello! (the fruit never falls far from the tree, do it.)
why are others allowed?
theoretically, they aren't....
but you know as well as i, that in this age of proxy servers and those who advocate throw away email addresses, it is hard, if not impossible to be 100% certain if Cl@y or C1@y is a 'newbie' who happened to like the way that C1ay spells his name, a returnee/reincarnation of a banned member or just a troublemaker (remember Jack Ammnann?) who was here to sow the seeds of discontent
i dare say that you have noticed over the last few months there have a number of newbies who proved in their first 1 or 2 posts, who they were and why they were here? you will also notice that they are no longer with us...
ZDNet Days were in another time.
When those genuine trouble makers came in, everybody rallied around, jut like a family does when it is threatened.
Then things changed. Sure, there had been "family fights". But these were without hatred. That changed. Hate took over. Getting even became paramount. If you were not with us, you were against us.
It's still that way. Without their hate I suspect they would be lonely.
Those were the days my friend...
...we thought they'd never end, we'd sing and dance forever and a day. We lived the life we choose....
Back to Speakeasy forum
(Page 1 of 2)