I work for a small public school district. With the exception of a handful of machines, the IP of every device on our network is hidden by NAT. The end result is we have hundreds of computers that appear to the outside world to have the same IP. So seeing the same IP is no guarantee it’s coming from the same computer.
The super-secret tests don’t even necessarily have to come back positive. Often, a previously-banned poster will come back and immediately do something else that would be ban-worthy in its own right.
And then there are those who seem to want to be caught. Many socks use a consistent pattern for all of their usernames. One I remember registered 26 usernames in a row, one for each letter of the alphabet. Another one always had a metal in its username. Other times, they’ll jump right back into the threads they were in before and continue the conversation (if it can be called that) as though nothing had ever happened.
And this is why they don’t routinely sweep the membership lists to see if two users have the same IP number, and if they do, ban them both. We have plenty of cases where two members live together and use the same computer, and this is not a problem. They only bother to check a user’s IP if someone comes to their attention as a troublemaker.
Getting banned from an internet discussion board is truly lame. That’s like being refused access to the bathroom at a gas station.
Obviously. Two users could also have the same IP if they live in the same house or if they both post from the same smartphone using the same carrier in the same city. The same IP is not proof positive but it’s a very good indication if other patterns are there.
That’s why the board software doesn’t automatically ban people trying to log in from the same IP with a different username.
I don’t know if that’s even possible with standard vB. What can happen is that an Admin can block an IP address or a range of IP addresses. People who are on one of those won’t even be able to read the board.
I was going to say pretty much the same thing. Someone doesn’t get banned for occassionally being a jerk or obnoxious, but usually from repeat behavior. They then usually come back and either repeat the behavior because they just can’t really stop or because they deliberately want to prove something or come back deliberately to troll. I imagine those cases are pretty easy to pick out.
If the person is legitimately different, they seem to be harder to pick out, I only recall ever seeing a few long term socks banned, but it’s probably difficult to make any sort of judgment about how many of them there actually are because, well, if they can’t be traced back because they’re acting legitimately different, we’re not going to find them, and if they are legitimately contributing now, how much does it really matter anymore?
Dammit, our secret is out!
It’s true, if a sock could refrain from acting in whatever way got him/her banned in the first place, it’s possible that the staff would never notice the footwear. Maybe even likely.
Yep. This is sometimes a problem and we end up IP blocking an entire something – a department, a company, a building, a school – when it’s just one jerk.
We do try not to block innocent people but sometimes it happens. We’re usually able to sort out the situation and make it right.
Usual progression. Poster, bad poster, banned poster, comes back as sock. Gets caught or not caught but still banned again eventually. Wonder how many of these there are? Good poster, creates sock once in awhile. Sock gets banned. “Good poster” remains. Kinda a Dr Jekyl/Mr Hide poster rather than degenerating asshole poster.
I can think of a couple of scenarios, one hypothetical and probably unlikely, and one that has happened at least a few times, that don’t end in banning.
Poster creates sock, posts as sock once or twice, but doesn’t cause any trouble, then abandons sock and never gets caught.
Past poster wants to return but forgot username or password. Creates sock but is upfront about it. Admin patiently explains what poster should have done, then merges new account with old account.
I did that. Had the 90 day or whatever it was freebee back when you HAD to pay to stay long term. It expired. A good while later I came back in as a “guest” when I found out it could be free, explained it to the powers that be and they merged names ala THE FLY or changed my past posts ala Stalanistic Russia or something like that.
Probably not as common as you think. That alphabet sock I mentioned bragged under several of its other names that it was actually a prolific and well-respected poster, and that everyone would be shocked and amazed when we found out who it actually was. Well, eventually, it got impatient, and confessed under its “established” name. Whereupon everyone responded with “Who are you again? Do we know you?”.
Now thats funny.
I was an unintentional sock. In my earlier, naive days, I did not realize it might not be a good idea to use your real name as my user name and so registered like that. Later I realized my mistake and reupped as Siam Sam, then forgot about that first incarnation. Then one day the Dope police caught up with me in the form of an e-mail telling me I’d been discovered and that I could not post under this name anymore. I told them my mistake, and those earlier messages were all changed to my present user name. I still don’t know what tipped them off.
Brundlefish! :eek:
This is all true. We hav more sophisticated software vB now. It merely tells us that another user with the same computer has posted. Usually, it’s a SO. We pick up on that rather quickly and ignore it. If it’s a returnee, it’s rather obvious.
I can quite easily imagine somebody creating a sock merely to enjoy the pleasure of posting with two different personas.
Of course, in this case, they would have to be very careful to avoid posting something with the wrong account that would blow their cover and expose their footwear, so to speak.
Regards,
Shodan
What is the recidivism rate for banned-to-socks?