Agreed!

I gave user 'palhal' a 30 day ban for a blatant racist comment towards another member of the site. If he does it again when he returns I see no reason not to ban him permanently

Hi @Banks, any update on the multi detectors? Got a slew of users who I can only suspect are multi's but can't do anything about it until we know for sure.

@BeterChiarelli

Hey man, im gonna let you back track your comment with that Caerii guy Here because I tend to agree with his report message in that threatening an infraction for trolling due to a disagreement isn't the best look there. Not agreeing/disagreeing with actual take though, just that from what I saw, I didn't see any rules actually being broken and while an argument can get heated with disagreement, its certainly not cause for threatening infractions and what not IMHO.

I fully intended it as a warning, not a threat, something I've done on multiple occasions to a generally positive reaction: taking the opportunity to actually engage with them instead of just slapping on an infraction or warning has been a productive tool for me historically. Based on that user's posting history, I'm not at all surprised that they jumped at the opportunity to play the victim.

I'd ask you go back and re-read their replies: they were pretty obviously goading me into where that conversation went. Should I have known better than to engage? Yes. Am I comfortable walking it back? Right now, no. The damage is already done. I'll reconsider in the morning when I'm less charged about it.

In the meantime, I take no issue with stopping my practice of warning users via replies.

Sorry man, I disagree and have read the entire post. While there's snark there sure at one point, its totally tolerable and within the rules IMHO. No more than some of my replies to be absolutely honest. As much as its annoying as f***, "goading" at least that level isn't infraction worthy if its done within the rules.

I do believe this was more against the rules than anything he did:



And this IMHO looks like a power trip as there was clearly nothing done to cross any lines.



Listen, i prefer the mods take the onus themselves to correct the situation if there is some sort of dispute against them because 1) If I just delete everything it just looks like we're just trying to cover everything up and 2) if you were given an warning/infraction, they'd never know about it which only leaves them questioning if mods are above the law so to speak.

Honestly, just easier for everyone to get ahead of it and clear the air. Believe me, if I truly felt he was in the wrong here I'd gladly be throwing down some words but I can't in good conscience say he did anything wrong there and if anything, respectfully, you were much more in the wrong than he was.

Finally got around to it. It's been a bad week for me and I think my emotions got ahead of me on this one, even so far as getting in my own way for getting an apology out.

In more focused news, what's the mood of the room for permanently banning user Campabee during his next infraction?

Yeah I hear ya bud. We all have to deal with it sometimes. Just got into a little spat on an Anderson for Schmidt AGM that took all my will power not to go nuclear on someone. Lmao

As for Campabee, outside of the occasional troll reply of offering his teams worst player for another teams best player to make a point of his displeasure of the trade he's discussing, I haven't seen much against him. Whats up?

There was a recent thread with a similar situation: another user was giving Anderson the ol Campbell treatment and he went on a trolling and reporting spree with anyone that disagreed with his takes.

People have the right to be wrong but to be that petulant and infantile about it was ridiculous. They're at a sum total of 15 infraction points and I think it's time we start considering termination.

Oh wow didn't even realize he was that bad. Yeah if it continues, a 30 day ban could be a nice stiff warning I think. After that its a paddling for sure.

A multi account detection:
Kinger25
SomeonesOffended
JesikaMorris

I have permanently banned the SomeonesOffended and JesikaMorris accounts and assessed a one-month ban to the Kinger25 account. If this user continues to evade these bans with alternate accounts, we will be forced into permanently banning the Kinger25 account and any and all alternates. Please keep an eye out for any alternate accounts over the next week or so!

I believe he just got off a 1 month ban and these accounts were made a while ago. I'll revert the 1 month ban, and give him a warning, but please keep watch as I believe this is a problematic user.

The 1-month reversion seems counterproductive based on your assessment. If this is a suspected problematic user, has just come off a ban on a previous account for their posting habits, and this was the second time they were caught using alternate accounts, why aren't we enforcing a one month ban? Is it just to prevent the creation of more alternate accounts?

The accounts weren't recently created and yes I would guess this user would continue to create additional accounts if we banned him again.

@Jarvis @Banks

Can I get an alt check for user KayceeMoonlight? This account has been around since July and does not post anything but has a history of spamming forum reports.

I dont see anything for that user.

Hey Jarvis, just curious, how does the detection work exactly? Like did you scan these users manually or do you get some sort of alert when a few are detected? Is their a way to upscale detections/ feed all the users accounts through the detectors to see any multi's, etc? Maybe do a once a month purge?

Also, just on a side note, looping @banks as well, is this all even really necessary? I only ask because this kind of feels like a endless endeavor to a certain extent. If a user creates a second account, the multi gets banned but not the original. If the original later gets banned for whatever reason, they just create a new account which won't get flagged for a while (Not to mention the myriad of ways to create a second acct with a different IP to avoid detection, etc) And frankly unless one of the mods on a hunch, suspects the user of being a multi and asks one of you, the only other way of knowing is through the multi detectors which unless we're being notified on the regular, they'll have tons of time to post and comment. Chances are they'd probably just create another account and we'll not even know till months in anyway.

May just be easier to let users create secondary accounts? Its not like the current process is really deterring anyone. I'm pretty sure there's a Detroit/Tampa fan that is on their 100th account since they started on here. They don't even try to hide it anymore and know if we ban them, they'll just create a new one tomorrow.

I'll jump in here quickly.

From my understanding we maintain the practice because of banned users using alternates to get around their bans. It would seem to me at least that opening the door to alternate accounts we would be essentially eliminating the purpose of a permanent ban. This is why I've historically asked for IP bans despite Banks' ability to do so and their limited applicability (they stop the honest ones, the truly petulant will just use a VPN or bypass using alternate means). These punishments need to maintain their severity, not open up new avenues to continue flaming/trolling other users.

I would support some form of monthly sweep. Hopefully it's a process that can be automated. It's futility just comes with the territory, like removing bot posts or moving general discussion topics out of AGM to their respective forums.

User Mr_Gardoki has been assessed a one-month ban for continuing to flame other users. No more warnings: their next infraction needs to make the message permanent.

User Bakasbookos has been permanently banned. This user's go-to replies to any and all criticism was usually some crude "your mom" post and there's no place for their ilk here.

User Knuckl3s has been permanently banned as their account had 17 prior infraction points and this user showed no desire to correct their behaviours. Keep an eye out for alternate accounts in the near future.