I didn’t want this in the Pit, since I’m interested in an actual discussion of the question and not a pitting of a member.
In this thread we have a poster admitting to having and using a sock. A quick search shows that the particular sock was created during a period where the member wasn’t posting under their member name- that is, the member was using the sock in a similar manner to a name change. Prior to the posting of the above thread, the sock had been banned. However, we know from the member agreement that
I’ve seen in the past people admit to accidentally creating a sock, at a time where they lost their login information. But these individuals didn’t actually use the sock- they created a new account and were going about posting (sometimes for years) until for some reason the sock issue came up. These individuals were allowed to email an admin, provide information for the sock account, and sent on their way with a swift rap to the knuckles. I’m assuming that because they could prove the sock wasn’t used, they were granted some leeway. Makes sense. But here we have a situation where apparently someone has been posting under a different name on purpose. And we know that
One moderator and one administrator have posted to the thread, and yet the member remains a member. Which leads me to wonder: why? Is there a situation (and I don’t want to know exactly what that situation is, since then everyone will try it- a yes or no answer here will suffice) where this type of sock puppetry is acceptable? My only thought is that this particular poster has had one name change already, and instead of incurring the wrath of Dex
decided to circumvent the system. But isn’t that still a violation of board policy? Ack… my brain hurts.
I don’t see that you’re asking any particular question or asking for any particular discussion. You’ve found a situation where you think the Mods are not applying the rules even-handedly. That’s not a matter for “discussion” except in the Pit, so this is being moved.
And it is possible to have discussions in the Pit.
Bottom line: the rules are NO MULTIPLE SCREEN NAMES, and the enforcement is usually consistent. The wheels of justice sometimes grind slowly, but they do get the job done. Sometimes there are behind-the-scenes discussions amongst the Mods, that we do not want aired to protect the privacy of the members (or the former members.) Those discussions take time. So give us a little time, bob, before you start ranting.
She very polietly (I thought) posted a question and several people have voiced elsewere ever since the poster in question admitted she had been posting under another name.
When we see the Mighty Hammer of Justice fall swiftly on Sock after Sock, it does raise questions when one that openly admits it has no visible action taken against them.
I did that. I opened a 2nd account under a similar screen name and it was reported to the “people in charge” and they asked me what I was doing and I told them and they said one’s gotta go and I suggested which one and it went. Everybody that was involved was very professional about it (Of course Lynn wasn’t involved)
Before I saw the thread linked to in the OP, I saw the thread about the MIL wanting to be present for the sonogram. Saw “banned” under the username, thought “hm” and emailed the mods with my question. Coldfire’s response: “Got it in one.”