Registering multiple accounts

[Ryan S]

If you try to register multiple accounts in order to troll the board, they will be deleted. Quickly and ruthlessly.

99% of you will not be affected by this, but if anyone does have any questions, ask below.

[mckerney]

Whew, I was afraid you were making a rule against multiple accounts all together. I do have several accounts, though I have never considered using them for trolling. Starting arguements with myself in The Afoci's dynasty, yes, trolling with them, no.

[cthomer5000]

Originally posted by mckerney
Whew, I was afraid you were making a rule against multiple accounts all together. I do have several accounts, though I have never considered using them for trolling. Starting arguements with myself in The Afoci's dynasty, yes, trolling with them, no.

damn! there go our hopes of getting Kodos tossed on a technicality... mwahahahaha!

[Kodos]

You'll have to do better than that, my son.

[Easy Mac]

I tossed Kodos last night on more than a technicality. I think it was on a monorail.

[Maple Leafs]

I don't understand... who would be pathetic enough to register multiple accounts just so that they could bother the rest of us with their inane ramblings?

I mean, Jesus Christ....

I don't know who created the Jesus Christ nickname, but it wasn't me. Somehow I think SkyDog is assuming its me, but if he'd do some research he'd probably see that the IP address is one I've never even logged in from.

Take my word for it, that wasn't me.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by mrskippy1975
I don't know who created the Jesus Christ nickname, but it wasn't me. Somehow I think SkyDog is assuming its me, but if he'd do some research he'd probably see that the IP address is one I've never even logged in from.

Take my word for it, that wasn't me.

I am not assuming that at all. I have yet to review the J.C. stuff.

Than what are you banning me for, really now. A week just for that post count thing. Puhleeeze.

[sterlingice]

Originally posted by Kodos
You'll have to do better than that, my son.

I've always been partial to the Ko D'ohs name.

SI

[Havok]

My roomate might register an account on these boards since he is taking the dive into Hattrick and we use that same computer.

hope it won't be a problem

[sterlingice]

Originally posted by Havok
My roomate might register an account on these boards since he is taking the dive into Hattrick and we use that same computer.

hope it won't be a problem

If SkyDog were smart, he'd just check your "roommates" transfer wire for his team. There no way anyone else could be as addicted to trading players. I'm still trying to figure out of Havok somehow spells fumpen backwards

SI

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

I might have to make a second Account for my brother so he can update you guys on how I am doing when Im out in the field .

[mckerney]

Guys, I wouldn't worry about having two accounts that use the same computer. I'm pretty sure I have 5 registered, though I rarely use any but the main one.

[Ben E Lou]

Guys, please note the operative phrase in Ryan's post: IN ORDER TO TROLL THE BOARD. Neither Ryan nor I are the I.P. Police. I speak for myself, and I'm quite certain Ryan as well, when I say this: I NEVER look at the IP addresses unless someone does something to get my attention. I have no inclination to check the IP address of every new account that is registered. However, when a new account shows up and starts causing controversy or jumping into discussions in such a way that makes it obvious that this person is NOT a new member, you'd better believe that the FIRST thing we'll do in that situation is look at the IP Address to see who it is. (Just to let you know, the vbulletin software automates the search. In other words, I type in the first X digits of the IP Address of the offending post, and it shows me which users, if any, have posted from an IP Address that matches those X digits.) So, the short version is this: if someone registers another account from the same computer, there won't be any problems (and I in all likelihood I won't even KNOW that the two accounts have matching IP's) as long as that account stays away from controversy.

When I say controversy, I'm not talking about political, sports or religious disagreements either. NO ONE has EVER been suspended, reprimanded or banned from here because of any sort of disagreement in opinion with me on such issues. (For example, I rarely, if ever, agree with John Galt or Easy Mac on anything, but neither one of them has EVER been disciplined by me.) "Board discipline" is only given out when behavior becomes troll-like, personally abusive, etc.

[Ryan S]

In this particular case I would ask CHEMICAL SOLDIER to send me a PM before he registers the new username for reasons which I will explain to him when he gets in touch.

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by SkyDog
Guys, please note the operative phrase in Ryan's post: IN ORDER TO TROLL THE BOARD. Neither Ryan nor I are the I.P. Police. I speak for myself, and I'm quite certain Ryan as well, when I say this: I NEVER look at the IP addresses unless someone does something to get my attention. I have no inclination to check the IP address of every new account that is registered. However, when a new account shows up and starts causing controversy or jumping into discussions in such a way that makes it obvious that this person is NOT a new member, you'd better believe that the FIRST thing we'll do in that situation is look at the IP Address to see who it is. (Just to let you know, the vbulletin software automates the search. In other words, I type in the first X digits of the IP Address of the offending post, and it shows me which users, if any, have posted from an IP Address that matches those X digits.) So, the short version is this: if someone registers another account from the same computer, there won't be any problems (and I in all likelihood I won't even KNOW that the two accounts have matching IP's) as long as that account stays away from controversy.

When I say controversy, I'm not talking about political, sports or religious disagreements either. NO ONE has EVER been suspended, reprimanded or banned from here because of any sort of disagreement in opinion with me on such issues. (For example, I rarely, if ever, agree with John Galt or Easy Mac on anything, but neither one of them has EVER been disciplined by me.) "Board discipline" is only given out when behavior becomes troll-like, personally abusive, etc.

So why was I banned for 3 days? I've been an upstanding member of this board for 5 years, but didn't even receive a warning (and in my case, I was doing nothing malicious). As a matter of fact, you didn't even reply to 3 of my emails- all of which were cordial.

[wbonnell]

dola: here's the most relevant email I sent to Skydog contesting his decision to suspend me. Unfortunately, he never replied.

SkyDog,
I wish I could let this rest and simply return in 3 days, but I enjoy FOFC enough that I already miss it. In the bigger picture this is trivial, but still, I have to question your motives for banning me. Let's examine the evidence:

1. I created an alter ego account (first time, I might add) using the name of a well known philosopher- WK Clifford.
2. It is well known by members of the FOFC community that I am interested in "hard core" philosophy. As such, it was likely obvious to a good number of members that the poster was me.
3. The posts in the thread were EXACT QUOTES of WK Clifford- nothing more.
4. My reply (using the wbonnell account) was an EXACT QUOTE from another philosopher, William James. I didn't matter that I posted with 2 accounts. All I was doing was playing one philosopher against another. To be honest, I was too lazy to setup a William James account.
5. I have been an upstanding member of this community for 5 years! In that time, I have never trolled or stirred up trouble. Why would I start now?
6. There are no official rules regarding multiple accounts EXCEPT the sticky thread posted by Ryan S. In that thread, Ryan S outlawed creating of alter-ego accounts for the purpose of trolling.

That said, I can only thing of 2 reasons why you may have suspended me:

1. That you were offended by WK Clifford post and, as such, took it be "trolling".
2. You are disallowing all alter-ego's specifically when one using one account to post to another.

I don't believe it was number 1, since I don't think you are easily offended. So- at least in my hypothesis- that leaves 2. I tend to agree that allowing one to post to an alter-ego account could lead to disorder, however mild. I will refrain from doing so in the future.

In short, no maliciousness was intended. I was truly having fun and trying to make a point using two philosophers against each other. Considering that I am a long-time member, I would have appreciated a warning first. At this point, I would appreciate the removal of my suspension. Moreover, I think the community needs to decide where it stands on this issue in general.

Cordially,
William Bonnell

--- Ben Lewis wrote:
> posting under 2 names in the same thread....that is
> deceiving
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wbonnell [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2003 1:11 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: locked out
>
>
> This is a message from wbonnell at Front Office
> Football Central (
> http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/index.php ).
> The Front Office
> Football Central owners cannot accept any
> responsibility for the contents of
> the email.
>
> To email wbonnell, you can use this online form:
> http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...form&userid=19
> 6
>
> OR, by email:
> mailto:[email protected]
>
> This is the message:
>
> Huh? Seems pretty absurd to me. I wasn't trolling or
> deceiving anyone...
>

[Havok]

If SkyDog were smart, he'd just check your "roommates" transfer wire for his team. There no way anyone else could be as addicted to trading players. I'm still trying to figure out of Havok somehow spells fumpen backwards

LOL

he decided not to play Hattrick anyway so no worries

[Ben E Lou]

wbonnell:

1. It certainly wasn't well-known to me that you are interested in "hard-core" philosophy as you put it. It wasn't obvious by any means. I got PM's and e-mails about the thread, asking what the heck was going on.

2. I find it odd that you'd question my motives. I had no history with you whatsoever that I can recall. I had no opinion of you. I had no knowledge of your "well known" interest in philosophy. Therefore, I had no motives other than to deal with what I saw. All I saw was some guy arguing with himself in the same thread. That's an automatic suspension in my book.

3. I have been fairly busy lately, plus I had to leave town unexpectedly for two days. Again, I saw it as some guy arguing with himself in the same thread, so responding was low on my priority list in a busy time. That's why I didn't get back to you.

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by SkyDog
wbonnell:

1. It certainly wasn't well-known to me that you are interested in "hard-core" philosophy as you put it. It wasn't obvious by any means. I got PM's and e-mails about the thread, asking what the heck was going on.

2. I find it odd that you'd question my motives. I had no history with you whatsoever that I can recall. I had no opinion of you. I had no knowledge of your "well known" interest in philosophy. Therefore, I had no motives other than to deal with what I saw. All I saw was some guy arguing with himself in the same thread. That's an automatic suspension in my book.

3. I have been fairly busy lately, plus I had to leave town unexpectedly for two days. Again, I saw it as some guy arguing with himself in the same thread, so responding was low on my priority list in a busy time. That's why I didn't get back to you.

some guy? Well, I've posted over a thousand times, and I've been a fairly active member for almost 5 years. Anyway, I think you were too quick to pull the trigger. I didn't break any of the stated rules.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by wbonnell
some guy? Well, I've posted over a thousand times, and I've been a fairly active member for almost 5 years.

Well, just at a quick glance, there are over 100 people with over 1,000 posts. I'm sure there are many of them that I haven't formed any opinion whatsoever about.

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by SkyDog
Well, just at a quick glance, there are over 100 people with over 1,000 posts. I'm sure there are many of them that I haven't formed any opinion whatsoever about.

sniff sniff. I'm hurt.

Oh well, no biggie. Just remember that warnings (for unstated rules) are typically more effective...

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by wbonnell
sniff sniff. I'm hurt.

Well, I wouldn't be hurt. There are plenty of 1000+ post guys who'd be MUCH better off with no reputation than the reputation that they currently have.

Point well taken about the warning.

[thealmighty]

SkyDog, you don't know me from, as they say, Adam, and I only have 100 posts or so...

However, the last post you have (and especially the last line..."Point well taken about the warning,") are the reason I think this is the one board I come to every day.
This is a great board and I thank you for doing the job you do. I don't always agree, of course, with your actions, but I find them to be done for the benefit of the board, not the benefit of you or a few well known posters.

Maybe I should PM this instead, but I wanted you to know you are appreciated.

[JeeberD]

As Fritz would say...

Asskisser...

[thealmighty]

I don't kiss ass, I kick it.

and anyway, I don't act like an ass like the people who get sent "to the box," so I don't need to kiss ass. I am thealmighty, how can you mess with me.

[Ben E Lou]

bump

[Blade6119]

Originally posted by SkyDog
When I say controversy, I'm not talking about political, sports or religious disagreements either. NO ONE has EVER been suspended, reprimanded or banned from here because of any sort of disagreement in opinion with me on such issues. (For example, I rarely, if ever, agree with John Galt or Easy Mac on anything, but neither one of them has EVER been disciplined by me.) "Board discipline" is only given out when behavior becomes troll-like, personally abusive, etc.

Hell...ive never been on skydogs good side in my mind, and i havent heared one thing my way from him...there there to stop annoyances and jerks(some , not fueds....so everyone vs. kodos is still ok!