I don’t know if there would be any technical issues with it, it’s just a bad idea that would invite trolling and other problems. I’d never consider approving it and I don’t think I’m the only one, but I don’t mean to be overly presumptuous.
Great idea. Socks are not intrinsically bad, provided there’s no deception.
Of course, there should be a special fee for opening up a sock account - how about $25 each for a 3 month subscription? Surely, nobody would need longer than that to share their highly personal, sensitive and most likely fictional problems. Nonsocks could of course post there without extra cost.
Proposed forum name: Yank My Chain
I think you just did.
If it’s not a technical problem, it seems to be no particular problem to try it for a month and see what happens. Being convinced that it will be a “bad thing” doesn’t make it so. I told people at another forum I inhabit about the BBQ Pit here and how it was a good way to let people sort out problems without derailing everything, and they were all convinced that no such thing could ever be–regardless that there was an actual working example that had existed for years and years. And if the mods can tell who is posting behind the anonymous name, it’s not like people are really going to be able to get away with anything. If they misbehave they still get banned.
I don’t see how having a TMI forum would encourage trolling where the Pit wouldn’t, anonymity notwithstanding.
I didn’t say it’s not a technical problem, I said I don’t know if it would be or not. I said that, technical problems aside, the reason I can’t see us ever trying it is that it’s a godawful idea. Is that clearer? You can do that kind of thing plenty of places on the 'net, it’s true. So do them there.
I agree. One of the best points of the SDMB is that one knows who one is talking to - their history, personality, foibles, etc. It’s a community here, for good and bad. Allowing socks would destroy that.
You want me to tell you?
For what it’s worth, a few years back I really, really wanted to make an alternate user name to ask one very specific question; I personally know a few people who also post on SDMB and the question I wanted to ask would have been at the very least embarrassing, possibly hurtful to some of the people I know who post on the board. I PMed a Moderator and asked if I could do so, with the conditions that I would only ever use this sock for the question I was wanting to ask, that I would notify the mods of the choice of username, and that I would have the alternate account deleted when the thread had run its course. The Mod (SkipMagic) said that they discussed the idea briefly with other mods and that they had to deny the request. I think that, given all the conditions I proposed, and how open I was with my request, that the primary reason for denying the request is something along the lines of why I can’t have pet fish in my apartment (which states in the lease agreement that pets are not allowed); as soon as you allow one person to do it, you create a shitstorm where EVERYONE demands to do it and they point and say “but you let THEM do it!”
It occurs to me that one alternative to “honest socks” would be a variant on the “PM people you respect for advice” suggestion. For all I know, it has been done already. That would be to PM another poster that you trust and ask them to post your question for you - the old “I have a friend with a problem, what should s/he do?” routine, except in this case it would be real.
I know that I would never PM someone and ask them to do this for me, but if someone asked me to do it for them, I’d be happy to help.
Or would that be considered some weird sock-by-proxy sort of thing?
I’d say yes. We’ve allowed it in the past (and the mods have relayed messages like that) in some emergency cases, but not in the way you’re describing, where one poster just makes the post for another who wants to be anonymous.
I think the issue is that while there are some advantages to having fully disclosed socks (white, with red stripes, if you must know), moderating such a system would be a nightmare.
My recommendation was half serious. I suspect that there would be few takers if the entrance fee was $25. But if that is the case, can we really say that modifying the rules in this instance would serve a compelling need?
[CairoCarol: Jokes aside, methinks your question and your stance were good ones. To be honest, the no-sock rule puzzled me for a couple of years, until I learned of what socks tend to do in practice on this and other boards. It risks inviting mayhem.]
It occurs to me that we’re discussing a niche product. Maybe somebody tolerant of a certain amount of aggravation would want to host this idea at a satellite board.
Cite? :dubious:
Like I pointed out, I’ve seen that same exact sentiment said that same exact way about many other things. But the only real measure of merit is making an honest attempt. Anything before that seems to be just bluster. Ancdote doesn’t equal data, but assertion really doesn’t.
I have to cite my opinion now?
I’m sure it works other places on the internet; I think it’s a lousy idea here. Does that make more sense? Without being pretentious about it, the SDMB is supposed to have a bit of a higher standard than a generic message board- we don’t do avatars, don’t allow insults in most forums, and so on. This is the same issue writ larger. If you want to post that way, there are lots of places to do it. I wouldn’t want it here because it runs contrary to the things that make this site unique.
I just have to comment how idiotic it is to ask for a citation to support an opinion. Sometimes, the forces who feel they must align against the authorities really need to think before snarking back. :rolleyes:
I’ve been posting to this community since the AOL years. Most here know me by my user name, that is, they recognize the name and identify it with posts I’ve made in the past. This is, to me, an inherently good thing. It means I can’t escape my follies, by simply sweeping them under some sock-made rug. I’ve said stupid things in the past, I know. Some posters, for all I know, may well think of one or more of them every time I post. I hope not; I hope I’ve risen above my stupidity. 
But the reason this is a good thing is that it makes me think twice before hitting the post button. Knowing it will be there for eternity, for all to see and identify with me, makes me more cautious. For some it doesn’t seem to matter; they will post any piece of stupidity without apparent worry that it makes them look idiotic. As a result, many such end up being essentially ignored, on the assumption that they are posting their usual drek.
Yes, it is certainly possible to posit a situation where a sock might be helpful to a person. But really, is this the ONLY place on the internet you feel you can bring up an embarrassing issue for advice? I would assert that this is in general a TERRIBLE place for asking such things, in the sense that, while we have a lot of expertise here, usually most things that get asked here that require such expertise can better be answered in other places, places where you are free to be even more anonymous than you are here.
Since there are downsides to socks, and since there is no upside to a sock that can’t be provided by posting elsewhere, or using PMs, or finding some other alternative, I see no reason to change the rule on socks. This has the added benefit of being one of the few rules here that is a bright line. 
This isn’t necessary and it will only derail the thread.
Some posters in this thread have been a little credulous in assuming people would not use sock accounts or a sock forum to troll, I think. That’s probably a good thing: that doesn’t happen very often on this board, although there have been a few noteworthy cases. But the truth is that people do screw with others on the internet this way. While this thread was going in IMHO, Don’t fight the hypothetical got banned because he’d posted as five different people over the course of eight years, and sometimes supported himself in arguments or even argued against himself to make drama. Over the weekend Freejooky got banned because he’d been five different people in five years to avoid the consequences of being a jerk, which got him banned previously under other names.
And that’s still less of a big deal than making up stories about real life crises, where people get emotionally invested and the drama can go on for a long time. Pick any MPSIMS thread you like about somebody’s family and health problems that you’ve posted in and imagine finding out the whole thing was made up. I think it’s clear why we don’t want to make it easier for that to happen.
Socks are bad due to the bacteria shit. The wee buggers eat our sweat, and that which they shit out tends to stink. Thus socks are bad, sometimes really bad.
Sock puppets are similar, in that they take the sweat of our brow, eat it up, and shit it out back at us in a way that really stinks.
Well I’d gather that you’re assuming something less than positive would occur if there were an anonymous TMI forum. Since there never has been a special, in-community anonymous TMI forum here nor anywhere else, it seems like a vast leap to assert that it’s a patently stupid idea when there’s really nothing to base that idea on. I’d personally be loath to say something is definitely (i.e. factually) stupid when I had no data behind that. Saying, “I’d be worried about X, Y, and Z”, seems like something more approaching an opinion.
If the moderators know who is behind the mask, it’s no more a moderation issue than anywhere else.
And it’s not something that you can get elsewhere. The SDMB is populated (in majority) by people we all respect as being sound minded and knowledgeable. Being able to post anonymously to 4chan doesn’t mean anything like being able to start an anonymous but serious thread on the SDMB. Frankly, you can’t start a serious thread pretty much anywhere else on the internet, let alone one very private to yourself.
Can you elaborate on what “same thing” occurred with Charter Membership? I don’t get it.
BTW, I think if the administration wanted to allow occasional anonymous posts from users, this is the best proposal:
…but that it would obviously need to be a feature added by the VBulletin folks and enabled by the SDMB. Either one of those seems unlikely to happen, but if the identity of the anonymous poster was automatically visible to the mods, it could be policed such that anonymously flaming, backing your regular identity up in arguments, and generally stirring shit up would be a bannable offense for your real account. That seems like a pretty workable and useful (for previously stated scenarios that warrant anonymity) system to me. I could imagine the checkbox being called “post anonymously” and coming with a warning popup that outlines the rules of posting anonymously, lets you know that you will not be anonymous to the mods and admins, and reminds you that abuse is a bannable offense.
In other words, a system could be devised that addresses all the concerns, but it would take effort, and it doesn’t seem likely that the right people think the effort is worthwhile.
I’m less reluctant to draw conclusions based on my experience.
Again, this isn’t anywhere else. Here’s a practical problem for the mods if you like: we’d have to keep track of which sock is associated with which user. There’s no way for the software to do it, so we would have to spend the time to maintain our own list.
A couple of times, we saw threads in ATMB about how stupid the “Charter Member” title was, and it turned out they were started by socks. I was saying it’s nice to discuss this with somebody who isn’t a sock.
Well like I said, I can certainly see why it would be technically infeasible. Being something never before done, in my experience, I’d be surprised if it was something that could be added to vBulletin without extensive coding. Possibly there’s some particular conglomeration of options which would allow such a thing, but I wouldn’t expect it.
Shooting off an email to the administrators to see if there is such a theoretical conglomeration of options seems like a quicker way to come to a resolution than arguing that the whole thing would immediately self-destruct with trolls and accusations, babies crying, and old people spontaneously catching on fire.