A call for calm.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-01-2013, 10:41 AM
RE: A call for calm.
(12-01-2013 06:51 AM)Vera Wrote:  It's just that this particular path inevitably leads to just throwing out everyone with whom we don't agree.
I think these suggestions were out of mere procedural sentiment. I'm sure IPs are checked without us suggesting which accounts should be investigated. Nami isn't good enough of a troll for us to find excuses to throw him out, but it doesn't hurt to figure out if he has been breaking the rules through sockpuppeting. If he has, he gets banned, if he hasn't then he is left alone. People already seem to be ignoring him now for the most part anyway.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 10:48 AM
RE: A call for calm.
(12-01-2013 10:41 AM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  
(12-01-2013 06:51 AM)Vera Wrote:  It's just that this particular path inevitably leads to just throwing out everyone with whom we don't agree.
I think these suggestions were out of mere procedural sentiment. I'm sure IPs are checked without us suggesting which accounts should be investigated. Nami isn't good enough of a troll for us to find excuses to throw him out, but it doesn't hurt to figure out if he has been breaking the rules through sockpuppeting. If he has, he gets banned, if he hasn't then he is left alone. People already seem to be ignoring him now for the most part anyway.
Does this mean that everybody's IP's get checked then? Or just the ones we don't like? Why should we check his IP in particular?

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderĂ²."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 10:52 AM
RE: A call for calm.
I would think it's when similarities in posts are seen that it sparks a look into IP addresses. By that I mean the weird, off-the-wall, and certainly super-controversial issues posts. We often don't see a couple people that will immediately agree on things like necrophilia or the owning of slaves or kid-bashing. Sometimes a couple posters will show up with eerily similar posting styles.

'See here they are, the bruises, some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way.' -JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 10:55 AM
RE: A call for calm.
Several years ago I belonged to a forum that had a member that went completely off the rails breaking nearly every rule. She was savvy enough to keep getting on with new identities but not savvy enough to fix her habitual spelling errors. She was pretty easy to spot. It got kind of funny after a time...you would think she's have figured out what was giving her away.

'See here they are, the bruises, some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way.' -JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 10:56 AM
RE: A call for calm.
Well, obviously my suggestion in DLJ's thread was truer than I thought. To each their own, I guess.
[Image: new%20lynching.jpg]

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderĂ²."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 10:57 AM
RE: A call for calm.
(12-01-2013 10:48 AM)Vera Wrote:  
(12-01-2013 10:41 AM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  I think these suggestions were out of mere procedural sentiment. I'm sure IPs are checked without us suggesting which accounts should be investigated. Nami isn't good enough of a troll for us to find excuses to throw him out, but it doesn't hurt to figure out if he has been breaking the rules through sockpuppeting. If he has, he gets banned, if he hasn't then he is left alone. People already seem to be ignoring him now for the most part anyway.
Does this mean that everybody's IP's get checked then? Or just the ones we don't like? Why should we check his IP in particular?
There is a basic rule that runs within social groups that those who are labeled as deviant are subjected to higher levels of surveillance. It isn't a flawless inclination by any stretch, and in larger groups (such as society as a whole), it can actually cause more problems than it solves.

However, this is a forum, and his deviancy is simply petty trolling, nothing big. That's still enough to warrant higher levels of scrutiny, even if all that means is a simple IP check. I do agree though that this wasn't the thread to call for it. A pm to an admin would have been a better idea.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2013, 12:08 PM
RE: A call for calm.
(12-01-2013 10:48 AM)Vera Wrote:  
(12-01-2013 10:41 AM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  I think these suggestions were out of mere procedural sentiment. I'm sure IPs are checked without us suggesting which accounts should be investigated. Nami isn't good enough of a troll for us to find excuses to throw him out, but it doesn't hurt to figure out if he has been breaking the rules through sockpuppeting. If he has, he gets banned, if he hasn't then he is left alone. People already seem to be ignoring him now for the most part anyway.
Does this mean that everybody's IP's get checked then? Or just the ones we don't like? Why should we check his IP in particular?
No, we engage in profiling. Profiling works.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
Exclamation I call for more repping powers for regular members Magoo 40 1,314 08-01-2013 04:23 PM
Last Post: Hobbitgirl
Question How does the talk show skype call work? UndercoverAtheist 7 353 02-10-2012 08:19 AM
Last Post: earmuffs
  Too poor to call LucasTheSwede 6 359 10-02-2012 04:37 PM
Last Post: Leela
Forum Jump: