Moderators

[ChrisE]

BroDeal had abandonned the original account and switched to the new one. there is no posting cross over at all and effectively the brodeal account ceased to exist on this site prior to Damiano Machiavelli joining.

The intention was to stop using an account, not to circumvent a ban or to troll, etc. As such, similar to Dimspace, being allowed to keep his new account, BroDeal has been allowed to keep his old one.

So why was DM banned then? Here is what you wrote in the "member suspensions" thread:

Damiano Machiavelli has been banned permanently as a sockpuppet account

If all was on the up and up with no posting cross over, and this was a "dimspace" type situation, WTH did DM get banned as a sockpuppet?

 

[ChrisE]

Do you have a case in the past of this happening? Certainly hasn't happened since I have been a mod. One person cannot hold two accounts so one of them has to be banned. I think a suspension would only be called for if the person is actively using both accounts at the same time and if there are interactions between them.

I dunno, I'm pretty confused why DM got banned for being a sockpuppet if brodeal was not being used, ie a 'dimspace' moment.

Brodeal is obviously still active so he had 2 accounts active, which violates your statement above. Obviously brodeal didn't PM somebody and say "hey, kill brodeal I'm now DM", because now DM is banned as a sockpuppet lol. So, why doesn't brodeal receive any punishment for not alerting the mods of having 2 accounts 5 months ago, and to kill brodeal?

How was he getting around the IP address check, and if he was why the secrecy on his part?

Maybe you guys should huddle up and come up with something consistent and believable lol.

 

[patricknd]

I dunno, I'm pretty confused why DM got banned for being a sockpuppet if brodeal was not being used, ie a 'dimspace' moment.

Brodeal is obviously still active so he had 2 accounts active, which violates your statement above. Obviously brodeal didn't PM somebody and say "hey, kill brodeal I'm now DM", because now DM is banned as a sockpuppet lol. So, why doesn't brodeal receive any punishment for not alerting the mods of having 2 accounts 5 months ago, and to kill brodeal?

How was he getting around the IP address check, and if he was why the secrecy on his part?

Maybe you guys should huddle up and come up with something consistent and believable lol.

don't hold your breath waiting for consistent and beleivable.

 

[Ferminal]

I dunno, I'm pretty confused why DM got banned for being a sockpuppet if brodeal was not being used, ie a 'dimspace' moment.

Brodeal is obviously still active so he had 2 accounts active, which violates your statement above. Obviously brodeal didn't PM somebody and say "hey, kill brodeal I'm now DM", because now DM is banned as a sockpuppet lol. So, why doesn't brodeal receive any punishment for not alerting the mods of having 2 accounts 5 months ago, and to kill brodeal?

How was he getting around the IP address check, and if he was why the secrecy on his part?

Maybe you guys should huddle up and come up with something consistent and believable lol.

You said that "the rules have changed", yet in my time I don't remember punishment being handed out in this case. Happy to be shown wrong, but any case would be treated on its own merits, in this situation we decided not to go with an additional suspension to the account which remained.

No one is allowed to hold more than one account, whether they interact with one another or not, so one of them must be terminated.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Susan - just because you don't understand something or know the backstory doesn't make it offensive.

 

[bicing]

Given the recent sockpuppet controversy regarding famed CN poster BroDeal, I am taking this opportunity to start the...

~~ *^*^* FREE DAOTEC campaign *^*^*^ ~~

It's only fair that since Dimspace/TSF and BroDeal/DM were allowed to use their sockpuppets that DAOTEC is allowed his too. He was an amazing contributor to the forum: who else could remember the Angel Vicosio priesthood transfer rumour, or his absolute dedication to bringing us the results from races such as the Faroe Islands Under 9's National Championships, or the intellectual mindful diplomatic debates he had with original sockpuppet master, Dimspace/TSF.

The patron of the campaign is Cadel Evans, who has traded in his FREE TIBET shirt, for a FREE DAOTEC sombrero.

 

[BroDeal]

I dunno, I'm pretty confused why DM got banned for being a sockpuppet if brodeal was not being used, ie a 'dimspace' moment.

Brodeal is obviously still active so he had 2 accounts active, which violates your statement above. Obviously brodeal didn't PM somebody and say "hey, kill brodeal I'm now DM", because now DM is banned as a sockpuppet lol. So, why doesn't brodeal receive any punishment for not alerting the mods of having 2 accounts 5 months ago, and to kill brodeal?

How was he getting around the IP address check, and if he was why the secrecy on his part?

Maybe you guys should huddle up and come up with something consistent and believable lol.

Originally I was going to completely abandon the BD account. I never posted as BD when the DM account existed. I switched IP addresses. I checked PMs for BD a couple of times because I get lots of them from various people, some of whom create accounts here just to PM me. I also got auto logged in once when using a browser with CN cookies I forgot to delete. When Martin contacted me, I told him to close the DM account. I suppose they would have accepted closing BD instead, but I overdid it with the DM account and some people take things way too seriously. The world just isn't ready to give hate a chance, especially Australia.

 

[ChrisE]

You said that "the rules have changed", yet in my time I don't remember punishment being handed out in this case. Happy to be shown wrong, but any case would be treated on its own merits, in this situation we decided not to go with an additional suspension to the account which remained.

No one is allowed to hold more than one account, whether they interact with one another or not, so one of them must be terminated.

I said the rules had changed when brodeal didn't get a ban for having a sockpuppet. FYI ChrisE got banned for having a sockpuppet a couple of years ago, and not while ChrisE was banned.

Since my statement about changing rules, martin has stated that it was ok that brodeal had 2 account because of the "dimspace" rule, along with some other spinning. After reading martin's post it felt like I just got off of that barf ride at the travelling carnival. But, he bans DM because he is a sock puppet, which totally contradicts whatever it was he was trying to say. I tried to wash his post thru babblefish to get the English version but I wasn't sure what the "from" language should be. There was not a choice for 'spinning to not ban an LA hater jibberish'.

But, why didn't my ChrisE account stay and my sockpuppet get banned, like brodeal?

You say we can't have 2 accounts. I say brodeal did not alert the mods of 2 accounts, and he was doing something to avoid IP detection. He had 2 accounts. I can defend him because there is nothing in the rules about this.

So in summary DM gets banned because he was brodeal's sock puppet, but having a sock puppet is ok as long as brodeal does not post because of the 'dimspace rule', then this same mod bans DM because it is a sockpuppet.

Then, you say we can't have 2 accounts so one must be banned, which contradicts martin saying you just can't use them both at the same time. Both of my accounts got banned, which further weaves this interesting tale.

Finally, there is nothing in the rules about this except using a sockpuppet while banned is subject to a member getting a lifetime ban. There is nothing in the rules about posting from two accounts at one time, and nothing about not having 2 accounts at one time, or a 'dimspace' rule.

Now, maybe this is all just a little too confusing but I think it has more to do with me (or somebody that is not a rabid LA hater) vs brodeal (or somebody that is a rabid LA hater). Just like it was me (or somebody that is not a rabid LA hater) vs TFF (or somebody that is an rabid LA hater). Or, any number of hundreds of posts where it is obvious LA haters are given more leeway than non LA haters. The 'go straight to jail do not past go' offense in here is questioning saint GL, of course.

Of course, martin has assured us when this subject has arisen over the last couple of years in this thread that the mod group would do no such thing lol.

Why don't you guys just have a separate set of rules for LA haters that is basically 1 rule: insult people all you want that you disagree with and we will slap you on the wrist for equal treatment window dressing, or spin some BS in the mod thread. And the other set for LA non-haters, that is akin to walking on a freshly frozen lake with 1/16" of ice or having a meteorite crash into your house. I think that would make things alot clearer, and thus would avoid these pesky posts when your inconsistency, err I mean, evenhanded punishments take effect.

 

[ChrisE]

I never posted as BD when the DM account existed. I switched IP addresses. I checked PMs for BD a few times because I get lots of them from various people, some of whom create accounts here just to PM me. I also got auto logged in once when using a browser with CN cookies I forgot to delete. When Martin contacted me, I told him to close the BD account. I suppose they would have accepted closing BD instead, but I overdid it with the DM account and some people take things way too seriously. The world just isn't ready to give hate a chance, especially Australia.

Its not about you, and I am glad you didn't get banned. That is not the point here.

You know I actually have fun with this. Welcome back.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I said the rules had changed when brodeal didn't get a ban for having a sockpuppet. FYI ChrisE got banned for having a sockpuppet a couple of years ago, and not while ChrisE was banned.

Since my statement about changing rules, martin has stated that it was ok that brodeal had 2 account because of the "dimspace" rule, along with some other spinning. After reading martin's post it felt like I just got off of that barf ride at the travelling carnival. But, he bans DM because he is a sock puppet, which totally contradicts whatever it was he was trying to say. I tried to wash his post thru babblefish to get the English version but I wasn't sure what the "from" language should be. There was not a choice for 'spinning to not ban an LA hater jibberish'.

But, why didn't my ChrisE account stay and my sockpuppet get banned, like brodeal?

You say we can't have 2 accounts. I say brodeal did not alert the mods of 2 accounts, and he was doing something to avoid IP detection. He had 2 accounts. I can defend him because there is nothing in the rules about this.

So in summary DM gets banned because he was brodeal's sock puppet, but having a sock puppet is ok as long as brodeal does not post because of the 'dimspace rule', then this same mod bans DM because it is a sockpuppet.

Then, you say we can't have 2 accounts so one must be banned, which contradicts martin saying you just can't use them both at the same time. Both of my accounts got banned, which further weaves this interesting tale.

Finally, there is nothing in the rules about this except using a sockpuppet while banned is subject to a member getting a lifetime ban. There is nothing in the rules about posting from two accounts at one time, and nothing about not having 2 accounts at one time, or a 'dimspace' rule.

Now, maybe this is all just a little too confusing but I think it has more to do with me (or somebody that is not a rabid LA hater) vs brodeal (or somebody that is a rabid LA hater). Just like it was me (or somebody that is not a rabid LA hater) vs TFF (or somebody that is an rabid LA hater). Or, any number of hundreds of posts where it is obvious LA haters are given more leeway than non LA haters. The 'go straight to jail do not past go' offense in here is questioning saint GL, of course.

Of course, martin has assured us when this subject has arisen over the last couple of years in this thread that the mod group would do no such thing lol.

Why don't you guys just have a separate set of rules for LA haters that is basically 1 rule: insult people all you want that you disagree with and we will slap you on the wrist for equal treatment window dressing, or spin some BS in the mod thread. And the other set for LA non-haters, that is akin to walking on a freshly frozen lake with 1/16" of ice or having a meteorite crash into your house. I think that would make things alot clearer, and thus would avoid these pesky posts when your inconsistency, err I mean, evenhanded punishments take effect.

You mean consistent even-handed thoughtful moderation? Moderators who are prepared to admit when they've got things wrong and over-reacted to posters? No bloody likely, much better to delete all the posts that dare to be critical of the mods and hand out infractions and bans.

 

[python]

a question to the mods...

above chrisE admitted to having at least some sock poppets.

he also clearly is unhappy about being banned numerous times (the funny part is he taunts other members about being moderated..)

it seems to me his whining is directed at the mod who did not go along with his sock puppets being as legal as those of another member.

as i recall it, he frequently insulted many members and was baiting and flaming concurrently from several accounts.

does this make his case different from the bd/machiavelli ?

 

[patricknd]

a question to the mods...

above chrisE admitted to having at least some sock puppets.

he also clearly is unhappy about being banned numerous times (the funny part is he taunts other members about being moderated..)

it seems to me his whining is directed at the mod who did not go along with his sock puppets being as legal as those of another member.

as i recall it, he frequently insulted many members and was baiting and flaming concurrently from several accounts.

does this make his case different from the bd/machiavelli ?

I like your picture. You can almost pass as a woman

 

[Ferminal]

...

I can't say I can comprehend much of this, like I say, it may have been before my time. I think we have explained what has happened to BD/DM quite clearly and it is not as complicated as you seem to be making it.

Holding one account per person is common sense, but I'm sure we can drop a line in somewhere just for you.

 

[python]

I can't say I can comprehend much of this,

that was my point too. chrisE did not make himself clear other than his incessant (false) whining about being moderated for being lance armstrong fan.

he seems to admit to having violated the forum rules about sock puppets but keeps insisting his violations are ok. i am

 

[patricknd]

that was my point too. chrisE did not make himself clear other than his incessant (false) whining about being moderated for being lance armstrong fan.

he seems to admit to having violated the forum rules about sock puppets but keeps insisting his violations are ok. i am

You need to get a life and stop stalking Chris. I'm beginning to think you have a little crush.....

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

This issue has been explained to death. ChrisE, drop it. Any further discussion of it will lead to sanctions.

Susan

 

[Anonymous]

This issue has been explained to death. ChrisE, drop it. Any further discussion of it will lead to sanctions.

Susan

thats a bit harsh. Its not like discussing it is doing any harm.

Shut up or be sanctioned

ChrisE has some point, but, circumstances are very different on each case. My sp account was purely to post in the about the forum thread, did not post anywhere in the forum and only made a handful of posts to discuss my ban which i thought was unjust. Brodeal has created a second account intended as a replacement for his first account, the mistake he made was not informing the mods of this.

Then we have situations like DaO who created a second account to circumnavigate his ban with the intention of then posting within the forum.

ChrisE.. to be honest I havnt kept up with all of his sockpuppets.. but, its a bit like arguing about what you are going to do yesterday. pointless.

 

[patricknd]

thats a bit harsh. Its not like discussing it is doing any harm.

Shut up or be sanctioned

ChrisE has some point, but, circumstances are very different on each case. My sp account was purely to post in the about the forum thread, did not post anywhere in the forum and only made a handful of posts to discuss my ban which i thought was unjust. Brodeal has created a second account intended as a replacement for his first account, the mistake he made was not informing the mods of this.

Then we have situations like DaO who created a second account to circumnavigate his ban with the intention of then posting within the forum.

ChrisE.. to be honest I havnt kept up with all of his sockpuppets.. but, its a bit like arguing about what you are going to do yesterday. pointless.

it's a forum, discussion has no place here.

 

[spetsa]

it's a forum, discussion has no place here.

+1
Seriously Susan? Polish says more intelligent things on a regular basis.

 

[Cobblestoned]

This issue is ok for me. Forum life. Also makes clear certain facts often denied, balance in moderating and handling, which I pointed out often enough.
Of course not without beeing banned for just pointing out the obvious.
Where is the great Barrus, btw ? We need more bans.
Since he gave up, there are not enough bans any more.
Could tell you hundreds of story from German forums about crazy posters with split personalities or multiaccounts, or plans to take over the world.
I am just happy to having identified the heavy loaded BD-master early enough and not having risked too much - to not become a victim of his hate and daily provocation.
Motto was - let him life and avoid him as good as possible. Not worth a ban.

Was anyone banned because of discussing and beeing provocated by DM ?
If that is the case, he should serve their time in the painful world of bans.

No problem with BD at all. He is a catfan a hero member of team cat-thread.
He must be nice. Cat-friends have to keep loyal and be forgiving.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

The problem with the moderation is that at its worst it is a bit like the UCI. The rules become subject to arbitrary personal whims, vicissitudes, biases and prejudices. Coupled with a thin-skin and an inability to take any criticism or questioning this does not make for good moderation. The tactic of deleting any criticism of the moderation, or threatening critical posters with infractions and bans to silence the criticism is authoritarian and smacks of being afraid to admit that they were wrong.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So, in short the last few pages are about people complaining about a lack of moderation, but when guidelines are put in place this leads to calls of heavy handed moderation?
"My trolling wasn't as bad as posters x trolling"?
"My stupid off topic rant was deleted - what happened to free speech"?
"My sockpuppet account was deleted no-one wrote me a nice note to explain why"

Sure, the mods don't always get it right and sometimes there is an inconsistency.

But the alternative to that is to apply rigid rules with harsh sanctions, which IMO would ruin what is by in large a good forum where there are plenty of areas to cover all topics and a lot of common sense applied.

 

[kielbasa]

Let's all have a minute of silence for the sad state of forum moderation in the world.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=684155&postcount=4242

 

[mewmewmew13]

I think all the mods actually sound reasonable almost all of the time.
Most with bones to chew about them are displaying some issues anyway....

Team Cat Thread rocks

 

[BroDeal]

Team Cat Thread rocks

New Team Cat Thread group.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/group.php?groupid=12