Damn. Just Damn.
This is the first time I’ve posted in the pit, well irrc. There’s something about **Can of Pineapples ** role that needs clarifying. As I read the situation CoP was created to make mischief about another matter entirely, some long standing board snark from long before I got here. I was lurking on the LJ last night around about the time the Kaitlyn links were being posted there. On a simplified timeline:
-
One. maybe two (more?) posters discovered the contradictions in Kaitlyn’s past threads and posted them on the LJ.
-
The LJ mod turned them into links.
-
Various people said they had read the linked posts and found them very telling.
-
Posters began asking if anyone would post the links to the Dope.
5.** CoP ** posted the links.
(The links in fact occurred in a couple of batches, so 1 to 4 were in a repeating loop for a while.)
So, the someone(s) who did the digging didn’t want to post about it in their own IDs (because then people would know it was them who had made other posts to the LJ?).** CoP** decided it was worth getting banned in order to do so. By posting the links and coming to the attention of the mods **CoP ** gave up their chance to make any more of the specific type of hosiery mischief for which the ID was created. Something like the horse thief helping the sherrifs catch the murderer (not that Kaitlyn was anything like a murderer, ok!). Of course it’s quite possible that CoP is one and the same RL person as the link finders.
I just wanted to clear this up because it’s been getting on my tits that some folk have been talking out of their arses re the original motivation for the creation of CoP. And I’ll add that I find that particular topic (their motivation)of no interest.
FWIW I too think Paulberserker would not have got so arsey about Kaitlyn had there not been something overdone about his postings.
I have a feeling that Arnold Winkelried et al. are all pissed off cause they’ve gotten played for fools. Someone’s pulled a fast one, and I’ll just bet they’re going to get away with it. And they do not want others following suit, which frankly would probably be pretty easy in this day and age. So to discourage such behavior why not just call them a coward, pussy, whatever it takes to discredit them for being able to expose folks with complete anonymity.
And while I don’t completely agree with catsix, I do think there’s a point there. Sometimes mods can be such egotistical, knee-jerk assholes (like all of us) that I find it necessary to deal with kid gloves. Cause the difference between me and a mod is that I have no power here and thus can’t abuse it if someone pees in my cornflakes. Too often a mod has flexed their big strong muscles just for the sake of who-knows-what, and so I’m not surprised that some would just steer clear and find another way to deal.
YMMV.
FWIW, I suspected that CoP wasn’t entirely kosher after reading this post. That sounded like a sock with an ax to grind.
Thank you Arnold, for the reply. And although I understand the stance the mods and admins take, I’ve still seen various people say that they’d be, at least, reluctant to put their own account on the line. Again, everyone’s mileage apparently varies.
However, and I’m in no way bitching about what’s been done (just merely curious), why is it such an awful and cowardly thing to risk banning of both your sock (if that’s indeed what it is) and, more importantly, your regular membership to expose some fraud in that way? I mean, the person who does that is the one bearing the brunt, right? On top of that, gaining the ill opinion and ire of other posters for having done so in such an under-handed fashion. To me, that appears a more drastic course to choose, rather than any less damning options.
Actually, I did. And I probably shouldn’t have posted at all. There’s no use holding a mirror up to someone if their eyes are closed.
Your post made me laugh, regardless. 
Besides, how could they be banned if someone had e-mailed the links to the mods, or simply said, “Kaitlyn, there are some parts of your story that don’t add up-could you please explain these previous remarks?”
And then when other posters started questioning Kaitlyn/NumberSix, it would have come apart that way."
Besides, as this person has been here almost a week, they didn’t register just to out Kaitlyn. People have outed other trolls here before, and they haven’t been banned for doing so.
I’m glad that people on the Internet can feel better about themselves through laughing at me.
Y’know, I don’t feel like a martyr, I never asked to be a martyr, all I ever wanted was for people to not accuse me of and warn me for things I didn’t do.
I don’t have to be liked by everybody. I don’t feel persecuted by everybody. I do think there are a couple people who will never care what the facts are, though.
It was obviously a long-time poster/reader, though. So perhaps someone’s sock just got caught up in the drama of it all.
I would contact Kaitlyn privately via e-mail to see if she can explain the discrepancies in a convincing manner. If she can’t I would ban her and make the same post in ATMB that I did - “banned for lying about her past at the SDMB”. I wouldn’t bother starting a big old Pit thread to flame Kaitlyn because that’s not my cup of tea, but doubtless it would happen anyway.
My apologies, I thought we were discussing the issue at hand. I didn’t understand that you were wanting to rehash a past grievance. Carry on.
I’m sure that it’s comforting to think to yourself that people are just mean to you to feel better about themselves, or that they envy you, or any line that will take the responsibility for the reactions you get of of you. You did nothing wrong, people are just irrationally hateful to you.
But the truth is that you’re unpleasant. Every post you write is venomous and vicious, so you might want to look within yourself for the reasons why you are so widely disliked.
Tell me if I’m splitting hairs too fine here, but shouldn’t that be “banned about lying about HIS past”? Just sorta curious for no good reason.
Daniel
You would be wrong, I have no personal animus towards Kaitlyn. I barely noticed the name before this thread. My personal experience at the SDMB has led me to take everything I read here with a grain of salt, and the more “extraordinary” the facts being related, the less likely it seems. If someone tries to make up a long involved story that is later revealed to be a falsehood, I ban them because it causes a lot of drama at the SDMB that we don’t need, it really doesn’t bother me except for the hollering that will ensue in The BBQ Pit.
I said that it seems cowardly to me because that’s what I think. I don’t expect it to discourage someone who really intends to create fake names because they enjoy anonymous pittings.
Sure you have the power here to abuse the privileges we give you at the board. Take the example in this thread: a poster does a search for past posts by Kaitlyn and then uses a second name (against board rules) to post the information. I call that an abuse of board privileges. We don’t give members access to the search function so that they can use it for this purpose.
Penis?
.
Sorry. Someone was going to say it and this thread is already top heavy with gravitas and ill feelings.
At this point, we don’t know whether Kaitlyn/Number Six is male or female. I’m more inclined to believe the former, but we can’t say for certain.
Fair enough, although at this point I see no reason to think that it’s a girl.
Daniel
Those people can e-mail a moderator first and say “would it be a problem if I posted it on the board”?
Well obviously the person doing this is pretty sure that the sock puppetry won’t get traced back to him or her. If you want to say something that bad at the message board, then stand up for yourself and risk the banning. If you want to call a poster a liar, be aware that some people will disagree with you in the pit and you might have to defend your position. I don’t think it’s commendable to hide behind another name.
Damnit, I just took notice of Kaitlyn, took time out to read that 300+ post thread in her sig, posted to it about how great I thought she was, and came here and defended her in this very thread saying how hilarious she was (damnit, look at me still saying she) not 10 posts before “she” was “outed”.
:mad:
I neither know nor care.