Should posters using more then one account be banned?

[Deputy Nutz]

I think Mad and Partial summed it up pretty good. For the ones that have created two accounts or more, you know who you are, and we know who you are. So the bottom line is we do not need to see your other user names again on this forum. Get it Got it Good.

No more bullshit excuses.

[Little Whiskey]

guess we won't be seeing anymore mazzin posts??

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Maybe the IP block bot banned?

10.10.10.x

Thats possible. I doubt your school uses 3 IP's for the whole school. Maybe the wireless routers feed to 3 seperate routers. That I could believe.

Whatever. I am not a Computer Info major. I havent taken the core CIS class yet, which is requried for all business depart majors.

[Tarlam!]

No question. BAN 'EM. This is the best forum, and I am thankful for the labour pains we had over at JSO for this beautiful baby to be born.

Now that we have him/her, let's teach manners, respect etc etc.

[Noodle]

I think Mad and Partial summed it up pretty good. For the ones that have created two accounts or more, you know who you are, and we know who you are. So the bottom line is we do not need to see your other user names again on this forum. Get it Got it Good.

No more bullshit excuses.

Now that's calling a spade a digging implement.

Well said.

[woodbuck27]

I think Mad and Partial summed it up pretty good. For the ones that have created two accounts or more, you know who you are, and we know who you are. So the bottom line is we do not need to see your other user names again on this forum. Get it Got it Good.

No more bullshit excuses.

So Nutz.

I can assume from that post fr. you, that in the near future, we may lose at least two members, due to duplication of accounts here from the same person. GG.

That is just sad, if anyone is pulling that stunt, after all the crap at JSO. That was outrageous BS and hardship all around back then.

The result or a huge factor - this forum.

My feeling. Give anyone doing that some time , to think (goodluck with that), then deal with it, in accordance with the majority's needs and welfare.

If someone is 'in fact' doing that they are plain n' simple - careless. That cannot be tolerated because of the obvious violation of a trust.

Dam! I'm very surprised Nutz, that someone would be doing that.

[GrnBay007]

My stance on the matter is that if someone wants multiple accounts, fine. If it's a Mike Sherman name, thats cool. Have fun with it. But let Mad, Nutz or I know before creating it. This place is about fun, too. But be rest assured that if that account ever acts up in a negative or harmful way, both accounts will be banned immediately.

Just my opinion, but I'm kinda on the fence about anyone having multiple accounts, whether they act in a negative manner or not. When you look at it really, what's the need for it? What reason would someone have for making a duplicate account? From past experience with this issue, I'm sure most can attest to the fact that the person with multiple accounts generally had an agenda ....and most times, not all, it was to bring about a negative/irritating/mean aspect to the forum. Who wants that here? As soon as this starts happening there is an element of mistrust and trying to figure out who is who. Remember how many times at JSO that was a topic of conversation and how many times people said they wished they would not allow multiple sign on names?

[GrnBay007]

I think Mad and Partial summed it up pretty good. For the ones that have created two accounts or more, you know who you are, and we know who you are. So the bottom line is we do not need to see your other user names again on this forum. Get it Got it Good.

No more bullshit excuses.

Obviously from this and Mad's post, someone has more than one account and was busted. Thanks for catching it Admin. and I hope that along with the firm warning given, the 2nd name was deleted.

[Partial]

My stance on the matter is that if someone wants multiple accounts, fine. If it's a Mike Sherman name, thats cool. Have fun with it. But let Mad, Nutz or I know before creating it. This place is about fun, too. But be rest assured that if that account ever acts up in a negative or harmful way, both accounts will be banned immediately.

Just my opinion, but I'm kinda on the fence about anyone having multiple accounts, whether they act in a negative manner or not. When you look at it really, what's the need for it? What reason would someone have for making a duplicate account? From past experience with this issue, I'm sure most can attest to the fact that the person with multiple accounts generally had an agenda ....and most times, not all, it was to bring about a negative/irritating/mean aspect to the forum. Who wants that here? As soon as this starts happening there is an element of mistrust and trying to figure out who is who. Remember how many times at JSO that was a topic of conversation and how many times people said they wished they would not allow multiple sign on names?

Because if someone lets us know they want to have a novelty Q&A with "Mike McCarthy" then that is fine. These forums are for fun. If someone wants to have a little, I am fine with that. It's when things go sour that we obviously will have a problem. I am confident in our ability to prevent this from happening.

[Fosco33]

My stance on the matter is that if someone wants multiple accounts, fine. If it's a Mike Sherman name, thats cool. Have fun with it. But let Mad, Nutz or I know before creating it. This place is about fun, too. But be rest assured that if that account ever acts up in a negative or harmful way, both accounts will be banned immediately.

Just my opinion, but I'm kinda on the fence about anyone having multiple accounts, whether they act in a negative manner or not. When you look at it really, what's the need for it? What reason would someone have for making a duplicate account? From past experience with this issue, I'm sure most can attest to the fact that the person with multiple accounts generally had an agenda ....and most times, not all, it was to bring about a negative/irritating/mean aspect to the forum. Who wants that here? As soon as this starts happening there is an element of mistrust and trying to figure out who is who. Remember how many times at JSO that was a topic of conversation and how many times people said they wished they would not allow multiple sign on names?

Because if someone lets us know they want to have a novelty Q&A with "Mike McCarthy" then that is fine. These forums are for fun. If someone wants to have a little, I am fine with that. It's when things go sour that we obviously will have a problem. I am confident in our ability to prevent this from happening.

That alias sucked at JSO. I recall Zig and I trying to figure out if it was really him or not. I felt pretty dumb after that.

If it's gonna be fake, everyone should know - use 'Fake Rat' as the custom name or something.

[mraynrand]

I'm on the side of monitoring behavior. The folks that set up this nice forum deserve the right to set a behavior standard. If you don't want multiple screen names from the same person, that's fine too. It's just that I see no problem with someone posing, just so long as they behave themselves. If you think about it, how do you honestly know two posters are different people? Most everyone, with the exception perhaps of 'the inner circle' are no more than screen personas to one another anyway.

[woodbuck27]

*** Rev. 13 July, 2006. woodbuck27

Members. I've reconsidered this.

Simply BAN that member (person for life) and close his/her accounts.

Only after a call for a general membership vote on the matter with specifics supplied to make that decision. Vote YES to Ban or No.

I would also exclude the top 10 even 20 posters in this forum from the vote to remove the threat of the inner circle syndrome. { *** I retract this suggestion as the top posters in the forum (by number's of posts) may also have solid integrity and be as fair as all others and these people will most likely attend a vote }

No moderator or officer of this forum should be able to vote. { ***I retract this as it's unrealistic - given that the OWNER of his Forum must have a say and the Mods should be involved because of their Senior Appointment and knowledge of the facts }

Appoint twenty good members like a jury process or a standing committee for six month periods.

May I be frank.

I'm really wondering what is up here? What suddenly is bringing all this on? It's certainly not like we've grown much bigger - in a couple of weeks.

Partial was recently made a new Moderator; but what is up here to compel this concern and posssible response to ban?

In a forum such as this, to ban is equivalent to Capitol punishment. It's severe, a harsh approach to deal with a problem.

We're getting government , BIG TIME - suddenly - and there seems to be little wrong. It awakens all in me that I really am.

Suddenly posters with two or more screen names are the concern? I didn't observe any difference in the climate here of late, except some possible outrageous claims in public, which isn't the best way to snuff out the fox. mmmm

Back to the task.

I just checked, and we have less than 75 members with at least 100 posts.

I suggest that you keep the vote based on a majority of most active members, based on some minimum number of posts required to be eligible to vote.

The voting process removes any stigma of threat of people being tossed from here ,because of any discrimmination. If you are going to adopt a banning option, then I suggest you do so fairly, that the POLICY has integrity.

I suggest. The person being accused on any grounds, not just multiple screen names ; has a right of appeal.

Possibly in a debate process, before that voting body, and all other interested members, even though they may be excluded from the vote process, because of the criteria for eligibility.

A suggestion. Any member here for say 60 days may participate in the debate. The debate last 's for 24 hours and he/she will in any case likely get banned but we all at least are aware of what happened to Betty-Bob_Buttercup.

In some forums, people are clearly discrimminated upon and harassed and finally break or are broken and get tossed. I witnessed outright stalking on a forum (before I came to JSO) and harassment through the persons's E-mail service.

Terrible rottten behaviour of the worst order.They are there one day and someone backstab's them (the inner circle) and their GONE. It's pure fascism of the worst order - except noone dies.

It takes pressure from the membership before 'the facts', yea sure, are even revealed by the forums leadership. Some forms are all about censorship and a pure fascist system is in place ' to RULE ' not govern them. I'm a Canadian and know the difference between a Democratic Process in place and Fascism.

The part that will be complicated as I see this forums membership - is to discover what single person has multiple screen names. Good Luck.

You can't be analysing and guessing wrong. Some of you already believe that, this or that person isn't who they present themselves to be.

I can assure you. I am woodbuck27 'the eben actual' woodbuck27.

Noone could be me but me when it's so very hard for me to be me.

Sounds like another Yogi-ism.

See Ya !

[Scott Campbell]

It would be entertaining to "out" the culprits. And then we could have a bit of fun at their expense.

Somehow I don't think this idea is going to fly.

[woodbuck27]

It would be entertaining to "out" the culprits. And then we could have a bit of fun at their expense.

Somehow I don't think this idea is going to fly.

I really can't see a problem here at the present Scott.

Except for those accusing this or that member of being something other than - as they present themselves. I am a little taken back there or that makes me feel let's just say. . uncomfortable.

That in itself is to my observation - Rare.

[woodbuck27]

I'm on the side of monitoring behavior. The folks that set up this nice forum deserve the right to set a behavior standard. If you don't want multiple screen names from the same person, that's fine too. It's just that I see no problem with someone posing, just so long as they behave themselves. If you think about it, how do you honestly know two posters are different people? Most everyone, with the exception perhaps of 'the inner circle' are no more than screen personas to one another anyway.

"I'm on the side of monitoring behavior. The folks that set up this nice forum deserve the right to set a behavior standard." mraynrand

That is why we have moderators but to resort to banning someone for bad behaviour should 'in my opinion' be based on past attempts to change that person's ways. Noone should be outright banned for anything that isn't of a serious nature.

Serious infractions would include harassment via telephone or E-mails or attacks otherwise, than on this board.

If anyone is deemed guilty of vandalism of this forum or publishing any member's sensitive private info. that person has to be banned for Life as well.

No member needs or should be allowed two screen names.The reason why is moot as it must NOT be allowed.

Banning has to be set up on a common sense and fair basis. A policy adopted that is drawn up and accepted by a vote of the membership or otherwise be drawn up under a review process as we are in OUR infancy.

That will be part of OUR growing pains.