# WTF? Otto was just banned by Ed. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 10, 2008, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971 "2008-09-10T18:35:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 35
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/681 "2008-09-15T14:47:45Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > I think he wanted to be banned. If you read the message he posted, he even said, “I’ll take my banning like a man.” So that’s that. But one instance of open socking shouldn’t be grounds for banning, if it’s not a policy that’s going to be uniformly implemented. Two instances of open socking plus 13 prior warnings. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/682 "2008-09-15T14:51:18Z")
> [@Borborygmi](#): > > I dunno… are you _ **sure** _ that this was a sock account? > > _:: d&r ::_ I can’t see how it can be deemed to be a serious attempt at infiltration. The whole point of a “sock” is not to be suspected, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/683 "2008-09-15T14:54:09Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > I can’t see how it can be deemed to be a serious attempt at infiltration. The whole point of a “sock” is not to be suspected, isn’t it? Some people create socks just to troll and be nuisance. ---
**Author:** ![Noone\_Special](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/noone_special/32/2863_2.png) [@Noone\_Special](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noone_Special)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/684 "2008-09-15T14:59:00Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > I can’t see how it can be deemed to be a serious attempt at infiltration. The whole point of a “sock” is not to be suspected, isn’t it? As always, IANAMod, but IMO his actions were pretty much the \*definition \*of “being a jerk.” I say this as someone who has repeatedly defended the Great Uprising that basically forced \*\*Ed \*\*to reconsider and downgrade the original ban to a suspension – as lately as a handful of posts up thread – and I still defend it. And I defend the final banning just as strongly as I contested the original one. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/685 "2008-09-15T15:16:09Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > I can’t see how it can be deemed to be a serious attempt at infiltration. The whole point of a “sock” is not to be suspected, isn’t it? Well, there’s one of two options: either it was a “sock” in the subterfuge sense, which is against the rules, or it was a “sock” in the sock-in-the-face-of-the-mods sense, which is being a jerk, which is against the rules. If \*\*Otto \*\*wanted to argue his case with the administration, there’s email. If he wanted to post as part of the community, he could have waited until today. Posting when he did as he did achieved neither of those goals, it just gave him a public way to get his last jab in. And, mind you, I say this as someone who liked \*\*Otto \*\*quite a bit. But dude was trying really hard to get banned over this. _C’est la vie_, he has what he wanted; what better customer service could one ask for? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Griffin-Kentzel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/larry_griffin-kentzel/32/14787_2.png) [@Larry\_Griffin-Kentzel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Griffin-Kentzel)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/686 "2008-09-15T15:20:13Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > Well, if Ed hadn’t been a douche, **Otto** wouldn’t have broken a (stupid) rule. Two other members were banned / suspended in he heat of the moment. They waited patiently for their reinstatement last night rather than breaking a cardinal rule by registering a sock. ---
**Author:** ![NineToTheSky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5a626/32.png) [@NineToTheSky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NineToTheSky)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/687 "2008-09-15T15:31:12Z")
I’ve never seen a clearer case of message board suicide. It’s like he threw a lit box of fireworks in here. Unbelievable. ---
**Author:** ![Sapo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/688 "2008-09-15T16:13:20Z")
> [@fluiddruid](#): > > I liked some of Otto’s posts but I think any reasonable person understands that we can’t continue to tolerate rules violations forever just because someone is “contributing pageviews”. I have no doubt that a bunch of trolls in the Pit could generate a ton of pageviews, in the short term, but ultimately a moderated board is what we have to offer and it seems to work. Otto chose to break the rules and further to lie multiple times to Ed. I’m sorry things had to end this way but nobody’s above the rules, not even long time posters. I agree that you can only look the other way so many times before the rule loses sense. I also agree that you cannot go all mercenary and say “let him be a dick as long as he is a popular dick that brings the bacon”. That said, and at the risk of being an optimist beyond reason, I would take a guy with 13 warnings followed by 9 months of good behavior as a triumph of moderation. As someone who finally got it (long as it took). To suddenly drag his record to light and ban him for a minor slight, using his old record as support looks a tad rough. To me it doesn’t sound much different from banning him at a first offense without warning (acknowledging the big difference of his experience on the board). Ed says Otto was a thorn on his side. I ask, was Otto a thorn on Ed’s side or on the sdmb’s side. Judging by his popularity, it seems that it was mostly a personal issue with Ed. Was Otto generally being that much of a dick since his last warning in January? I must agree with those who see this as a suicide or a flameout from Otto. Chances are he no longer wanted to stay. Still, the socks as an offense are provoked offenses. Giving someone a timeout for someone else’s tantrum is a sure way to make the suspended go nuts. I myself have complicated simple issues by overreacting to what I saw as poor rulings. Not having a right to defend oneself sucks. And once again, fluiddruid, thanks for being a voice of reason. You might not be the most popular around here, but you top my list. Even if it wouldn’t qualify as a list by OpalCat’s standards. ---
**Author:** ![Sapo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ec9cab/32.png) [@Sapo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sapo)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/689 "2008-09-15T16:23:41Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > You’ve got a lot of inside info for a guy who left the site for nine months ago and was not involved in any of the disussions that went on late last week and this weekend. Everybody’s deeply indebted to you for your insight. Not for long, I will send you the bill. What inside info? I got here and the first thing that pops up is Ed foaming at the mouth and waving the banning stick like von Karajan directing Die Meistersinger in 1939. What secrets are there be known? What stupid crud are you trying to insinuate? Man up and accuse me of whatever it is you are thinking. You really got nothing to lose. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/690 "2008-09-15T16:26:04Z")
In fairness **Marley23** , \*\*Sapo \*\*returned a few hours before the shit hit the fan. Your accusation looks bad. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/691 "2008-09-15T16:30:28Z")
> [@Sapo](#): > > What secrets are there be known? What stupid crud are you trying to insinuate? Get fucked. You invented a bunch of bullshit that was incorrect, which I would know because unlike you, I have access to the facts. To review, it is not true that ‘Otto was not REALLY banned for having a sock,’ or ‘Ed doesn’t know who Otto is,’ or ‘this is really about the book.’ Out of the two of us, I was the one who actually participated in the discussions that lead up to Otto’s banning, you were the one who didn’t. Is the air clear of stupid crud now? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/692 "2008-09-15T16:33:56Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > In fairness **Marley23** , \*\*Sapo \*\*returned a few hours before the shit hit the fan. Your accusation looks bad. Don’t know what you’re talking about. The only thing I accused him of is making up bullshit, and that’s true. I wasn’t suggesting he is a sock, I know Sapo has been here a pretty long time. That doesn’t change the fact that Otto was banned this weekend for creating those two socks, and not because the eeeeevil Powers That Be were out to get him or because of anything related to Ed’s book. ---
**Author:** ![Ed\_Zotti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/fbc32d/32.png) [@Ed\_Zotti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ed_Zotti)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2008, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971/693 "2008-09-15T16:51:09Z")
OK, let’s not start this all over again. I think everything has been said that needs saying. Thread closed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtf-otto-was-just-banned-by-ed/462971.md?page=34)