I was reading a thread in the BBQ Pit about spoofing IP addresses that manhattan closed down and it occurred to me…since the mods use my IP address to determine whether I have a sock puppet or not, couldn’t I circumvent their vigilance by using two different IP’s?
(I have no intention of actually doing this, I’m just curious. I dream up schemes to overthrow the government in my spare time, so this is mild in comparison.)
I suppose I could go a little overboard and use that free AOL CD-ROM I got in addition to my regular ISP if I wanted to do this, but it could also be as simple as posting as one person when I am at work and posting as another when I am at home. What’s to stop someone from doing this? How can we know that people aren’t doing it already?
The whole seems like an extravagant waste of energy I know, but if someone REALLY wanted to be an ass, couldn’t they do it this way indefinitely?
It’s pretty well-known that it is possible to use several different ISPs to register sock puppets under. The inconvenience is enough to deter most people, since there is no reason to bother unless one intends to be a jerk, and if one is a jerk, one gets banned. Thus, in order to perpetuate the trolling, one must sign up for several different ISPs to register names under. This involves a lot of time and effort. Only a deranged moron would put in that much effort just to pester others.
It would not be hard to post under two screen names without being caught, as the mods generally only check IP addresses if they suspect you of something. If you manage to maintain two completely separate identities on the board, with no reason to look at IP addresses, you can probably do it from the same computer. That seems rather pointless, difficult, dishonest, and against the rules, though. But the mods don’t generally waste much time trying to make sure that people who aren’t disruptive are actually following other rules.
I respectfully disagree with waterj2.
I’m guessing that my case is typical, that people get new names NOT to be jerks, but because jerks hound them and won’t let go.
The rest is basically SDMB UL material.
“Everybody knows that…”
Well, like everybody also always suspects newbies, like HanibalV, it’s often easier to start over than deal with the real jerks around here.
waterj2 is pretty much spot-on. If you behave well, you can probably get away with 27 different screen names using 27 different ISP’s. Hell, you can probably get away with 27 names using ONE ISP. However, most people using double screen names (in violation of the rules they just read whilst registering) are NOT going to behave well, and are soon investigated. Should they have different ISP’s, they can still get banned for being jerks. Which is another one of our rules, as you all know. In short: the people that NEED this sort of manoeuvres are most likely going to be banned sooner or later anyway. Behaviour over IP.
Sangria, there you are again, posting in a troll related thread. Fine in itself. You link the thread where is can be seen (actually not, because the socks posts seem to have been deleted) that you acted in violation of our board rules for a few days. Things were sorted out. Would you care to show us the links that prompted you to assume a second name? After all these posts by you on the matter, I’m getting kind of curious what caused all this.
re: 1) You seem to be refering to the Alphabet bannings again. But they precisely contradict your point, you know. They never said anything bad, did they? You told me before that Andros had no information. He says he’s just been busy, lost his email, had a fight with his ISP, forgot. After all these posts by you on the matter, I’m getting kind of curious what caused all this.
Every day the mods and a couple of regular toadies like waterj2 repeat the litany that IP’s don’t count. But that doesn’t make it believable. They say you have to have bad behavior, but they are some of the worst behaved. So what is the real story, and why fight so hard to avoid admitting it? What’s at stake here if you just say “Yes, we screen IP#'s” “Yes, we ban people on hunches, or one cross word, if their count is low enough.”
The truth will set you free. Admit you are sometimes arbitrary. Then you can tell Lizard, as you have just so blatantly told Sangria: Now that you asked the wrong question, or denied, you will be watched. And that means banned at the first sneeze. And you’ll quickly learn that banning is worthless and you will come back as a sock, or two.
Well, I guess if the ice is broken, this may be the place to ask what’s been on my mind. We keep having these “Why were they banned” threads, and people guess it was a reason, guess it was Mark Serlin or Concrete, but we never really find out.
Why were
Why was Satan banned?
Why are people worried about SILENT-BOB and silent_rob and ChrisCTP? Are they all socks? Were they banned?
Why was Drum the drum banned?
Who am I leaving out? There were about 5 more this week, it seems.
R_dawg5 and**R_dawg6 **and **R_dawg7 **
If they keep coming back so fast, why the banning cycle at all?
I just read one of the mods in the pit say you guys were discussing what to do about this.
Whether to erase the banned threads.
But here it says one of the major troll’s threads were erased.
Yet, if anyone tries to actually discuss the pros and cons, they are accused of helping the enemy, instead of trying to discuss the same issues the mods discuss.
I’d kind of like to see some more openness to discussion, and some more specific explanations of bannings. I don’t think the secrecy is doing anybody any good.
Well, this thread has taken an unanticipated direction. I think some of the problems people like The Bean have stem from the fact that the agreement everyone agrees to when they register is vague: “Don’t be a jerk.” I’m not a lawyer or phonetician, but I DO know that even seemingly simple statements can be taken a variety of ways. Many people define “being a jerk” as someone who is deliberately nasty to others. Other people would call someone who doesn’t agree with their particular ideology a jerk. Or maybe a jerk is anyone who isn’t particularly polite. And there are even more variations.
And then there is the nature of the printed word. Of the various forms of communication that exist, probably only morse code is less efficient than printed words. If you really want to know what someone means, talk to them in person. After that, video conferencing. Then comes phonecalls, and after that, hand-printed letters. Things like the SDMB are all the way at the bottom. It’s sad but true that in this day and age many people are just not real good at communicating through writing. Without things like tone of voice or body language to help them communicate, people can be easily misunderstood as a jerk.
The end result of this is that the Mods have to decide when someone is being a jerk and when they’re not. Are they always right? Obviously not, or there would be no debate over this issue on the Board. But the Mods are human too. With the obvious exception of myself and maybe Cecil, hardly anyone is right all the time.
And then there’s the short attention spans most people have. Like, what are the odds anyone even read this post all the way down to here?
None of the posters you mentioned there have been banned. As for silent_rob, he’s been the definition of busy for the last few weeks. Although he’d love to post, he just doesn’t have the time. As soon as his work’s finished, he’ll be back.
And I must say, it’ll be nice to have him back. Maybe then I can forget about the scum that’s been sliming up the boards lately.
And Lizard! Putting yourself as a superiour to Cecil in any respect’s gonna get you into trouble!
Sangria, I was not referring to people who feel the need to surreptitiously (or at least quietly) change identities. I would wager that most of the screen names banned for violating the “one name per user” rule were registered by people intending to be jerks. I will agree that most people who register more than one name do so for somewhat rational reasons. The discrepancy comes from the fact that people who honestly feel hounded or are banned in error or whatever will usually only register one additional name, while people who want to be jerks have registered upwards of twenty.
Also, I doubt you got a new ISP to use to avoid detection. So you were not the type of person I was talking about.
I didn’t say I was superior…I mean, I gave him the benefit of the doubt, didn’t I?
Congratualtions on not having a short attention span, AudreyK. I’m assuming you didn’t just happen to spot that one provacative line out of my post, and actually read the whole thing.
There are a number of tools which we use to identify sock puppets and other problem posters, one of which is the IP address. Most of our information actually comes from just looking at the content and style of a person’s posts. An IP which matches a known troll is not sufficient grounds in itself to ban a person, but it will usually cause us to take a closer look at that poster.
There are a few cases where we’ve removed posting privelidges from a screen name with 0 posts, but this is only when it’s a very blatant and obvious sock, such as R_Dawg. Usually, there’s no way for us to know that quickly, and we have to wait for offensive material to show up under that name.
I believe the point is that the board administration doesn’t run around launching witch hunts trying to purge every poster who has two identities, although that is against the rules. But if you have two well-behaved identities, they probably won’t make a special point of hunting them down.
On the other hand, as has been pointed out before, the admins don’t ban screen names, and they don’t ban IP addresses–they ban people. (“IP addresses don’t troll. People troll!”) If a person gets banned for being a total flaming jerk, then comes back with a shiny new identity, that person will be swiftly banned again–before they can even do anything overtly jerkish–as they have now compounded their original crime(s) with an additional violation of The Rules. Capisce?
Anybody who trys to win arguments by using the word “Capisce?” is “overtly jerkish” if you want my opinion, but you clearly don’t want anyone else’s opinion.
If you would have followed the discussion, there seem to be 26 people who were banned for their IP#s who weren’t doing anything.
I had incentive here to look them up today. With Coldfire accusing me, I suddenly find I have to. Well, I found out a lot in a hurry. You could have as well.
Searching on “Andros” and “troll” in the Pit you would have found this thread of Andros’s near the top of 170 hits on him: appropriate moderating in GD?
Clicking on No Bones, you quickly find the 26 names Scylla - You are a fortune teller - What does this mean? And what a surprize! Waterj2 is there again. Guess he IS the designated toady, wrong as usual. Chronos, You guys seem to have deleted the big “girl fight” where someone (Byzantine? I don’t know their names, never did) started a pit thread just to attack me for saying there was too much “potty mouth” outside the pit (silly choice of words, but it’s how my mother always scolded my brothers and it just came out). I am grateful it’s gone, even if it does leave me have to answer to you. This is all I could find left
Who’s the jerk there?
Then she follows me on another thread, where I’m following the OP and she posts this
(Who’s the “total flaming jerk” there MEBuckner! She was! And in this thread, YOU are.)
I normally avoid these threads, as they tend to serve no purpose. They always just come down to those that point out the rules in the registration agreement and those that choose to ignore them. But I feel there is a point being overlooked, and it could lead to sore feelings.
While it is usually true that only those with multiple names that act badly get tracked down and banned, there is another situation that can cause this. If a person who is not acting as a jerk actually comes out and admits to having multiple screen names, the mods will insist that they keep only one while they remove the excess.
I didn’t want Sangria to feel she was lumped in with the jerks. She had one of her names banned not because she was causing problems, but because she admitted to breaking the rules. That’s why she is not banned (just limited to one name, as are we all).
I believe that anyone breaking this rule for non-jerk reasons will be given the benefit of the doubt. They will retain their posting priviledges, but with only one name. If anyone reading this falls into this category, they should e-mail Tubadiva. If the subject stays in e-mail, no one on the board will even be aware that you’d gone outside the rules.
I know this is going to come as a rude shock to your delicate flower of a system Sangria, but it has to be said. Sit down and take a deep breath and maybe you will be able to handle the startling news I am going to deliver to you.
The administration of this board is not required to surrender common sense as a part of our jobs!
Of course we banned those 26 names. When 26 names sign up one after the other, in alpha-fucking-betical order, we are entitled to think something’s up.
Now, on the nine-sigma chance that it was wholly a coincidence, any or all of “them” is free to email us and we will happily consider their request to be reinstated.
Until then, “them” was one or a small group of people violating the rules of the Chicago Reader, Inc.
Are you really so stupid that you don’t get this?
Now kindly shut the fuck up about the 26 sock puppets that we happened to catch. Thank you.
Sangria–Look, I haven’t gone and read all those threads you’re referring to. I would just point out that andros hasn’t been banned, and for that matter neither have you. The post I was responding to–by No Bones–seemed to be talking about these situations where some new poster pops up, posts three seemingly innocuous posts, and is promptly banned. I’m saying that what’s probably happening in those cases is that this apparent three-post newbie/lurker is actually the reincarnation of some flaming jerk from last week, and the board admin is acting to ban them immediately because a) they were obnoxiously disruptive the first time around and b) even if they haven’t done anything yet this time around, the fact that they’re trying to sneak in under the radar doesn’t bode well for a non-repeat of a). That’s all I’m trying to say.
