Why perma-ban people and allow them to return?

Chuck Stone

What is the point in perma-banning people from forums and then allow them to return under a new name?

I think this shows up a fundamental weakness in the boards.ie ban system in that it allows the banned to assume a new identity and fool less aware people into entertaining their trolling.

This method of dealing with trolls is simply dishonest. Why not just give people recurring bans if you're not going to give the 'perma' part of bans any value?

Insect Overlord

Who are you talking about? Posters who re-reg to get around bans do get perma-banned, once it's proven who they are. You should read the Prison forum more often. It's often as entertaining as it is informative.

Chuck Stone

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Who are you talking about?

I'm pretty sure I've called this person out on thread in AH so mods are well aware who it is.

Elmidena

Instead of calling out suspicions on-thread like a game of "Guess Who?", why don't you report the user and type your suspicion? That way an admin will see it and can run all the checks if needs be, and then Gordon gets a new playmate if you're right! Mods can't read every post on every thread, especially not on a ridiculously busy forum like AH, so help them out a bit and you both win (and maybe the suspect re-reg will too if it turns out they aren't who they're accused of being)

Elmidena

Insect Overlord wrote: »

Who are you talking about? Posters who re-reg to get around bans do get perma-banned, once it's proven who they are. You should read the Prison forum more often. It's often as entertaining as it is informative.

I admit I get disappointed when I click in on it and it's just spambots
But can we, the plebs, elect Pighead as a prison mod

Sharpshooter

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I'm pretty sure I've called this person out on thread in AH so mods are well aware who it is.

Not always Chuck, we cannot read every thread and post in AHs.

Did you report the user as a re reg?

Overheal

There is no earthly way I would expect even a dozen AH mods to read through every post of inane shyte that happens in AH. If there is one forum on this entire website where you really have to make use of the report button: THAT IS IT.

BuffyBot

I can tell you this much for sure - if there is sufficient evidence of a re-reg, they'll be banned. I speak as someone who banned enough of them in my Admin days.

However there isn't often sufficient hard evidence even when you know it's them, deep down. Sometimes you just have to wait it out until there is, or they trip themselves up or revert to their former behaviour patterns and get banned anyway. It's annoying but some will always through for whatever reason!

One or two have even come back as reformed, useful members of society

My name is URL

Seriously, is there not enough evidence to suggest that the person the OP is referring to is a re-reg? I'm sure somebody must have reported a post of his by now.

KeithM89_old

My name is URL wrote: »

Seriously, is there not enough evidence to suggest that the person the OP is referring to is a re-reg? I'm sure somebody must have reported a post of his by now.

If your referring to a certain poster beginning with the letter 'P', its still being looked at.

CodyJarrett

KeithM89 wrote: »

If your referring to a certain poster beginning with the letter 'P', its still being looked at.

You leave Pighead alone.

KeithM89_old

whiplashed wrote: »

You leave Pighead alone.

Oh id never ban Pighead

Also that other problem is now sorted.

Micky Dolenz

Just to point out, don't have an attitude of "shur, I won't bother reporting it, someone else will"

Don't call out people as trolls/reregs on thread. It's clear flaming. Report the poster/post instead.

padd b1975

Elmidena wrote: »

Instead of calling out suspicions on-thread like a game of "Guess Who?", why don't you report the user and type your suspicion? That way an admin will see it and can run all the checks if needs be, and then Gordon gets a new playmate if you're right! Mods can't read every post on every thread, especially not on a ridiculously busy forum like AH, so help them out a bit and you both win (and maybe the suspect re-reg will too if it turns out they aren't who they're accused of being)

What are the checks that Admin. run?

Gordon

padd b1975 wrote: »

What are the checks that Admin. run?

I personally run a μ-pet test, sometimes a β-than-u test, and rarely I'll lead a λ-slotter config in Prison.

padd b1975

Gordon wrote: »

I personally run a μ-pet test, sometimes a β-than-u test, and rarely I'll lead a λ-slotter config in Prison.

In other words, you wing it?

Gordon

We take it on a case by case basis.

We have a number of tools at our fingertips, managing a blend of utilities depending on the circumstance, searching deep if and when the need arises, or shallow if it doesn't. If this is what you define 'winging it' then you can draw your own pigeon hole from the limited amount of info I've given you. Telling you exactly what checks we make would make it a little easier for people to bypass our social security tetra-systems, so we don't tend to offer this info into the wild. Apart from the fact that we tap computer webcams, I think everyone knows that we do this. Many people take the precaution of putting bits of paper over their webcams sometimes, by the way.

padd b1975

Gordon wrote: »

We take it on a case by case basis.

We have a number of tools at our fingertips, managing a blend of utilities depending on the circumstance, searching deep if and when the need arises, or shallow if it doesn't. If this is what you define 'winging it' then you can draw your own pigeon hole from the limited amount of info I've given you. Telling you exactly what checks we make would make it a little easier for people to bypass our social security tetra-systems, so we don't tend to offer this info into the wild. Apart from the fact that we tap computer webcams, I think everyone knows that we do this. Many people take the precaution of putting bits of paper over their webcams sometimes, by the way.

Lol, not really a webcam sort of guy to be honest, but I appreciate the heads up;)

Seriously though, is not almost impossible to weed out a re reg with more and more people accessing boards via mobile internet?

My name is URL

We take it on a case by case basis.

We have a number of tools at our fingertips, managing a blend of utilities depending on the circumstance, searching deep if and when the need arises, or shallow if it doesn't.

Enough about your porn career, how do you determine if someone is a re-reg?

Gordon

padd b1975 wrote: »

Lol, not really a webcam sort of guy to be honest, but I appreciate the heads up;)

Seriously though, is not almost impossible to weed out a re reg with more and more people accessing boards via mobile internet?

Nothing is impossible with our custom built tetraquad-utils, they have Z-core technology, they are practically artifactual intelligence, way surpassing current artificial plastic stuff you get these days.

El Guapo!

Gordon wrote: »

padd b1975 wrote: »

What are the checks that Admin. run?

I personally run a μ-pet test, sometimes a β-than-u test, and rarely I'll lead a λ-slotter config in Prison.

Lol.
Took me a while to get the last one!

Gordon

My name is URL wrote: »

Enough about your porn career, how do you determine if someone is a re-reg?

We screen for venerable decrease.

RUCKING FETARD

Dean09 wrote: »

Lol.
Took me a while to get the last one!

I don't get it

El Weirdo

RUCKING FETARD wrote: »

I don't get it

That's because you're a rucking fetard.

Tom Dunne

padd b1975 wrote: »

What are the checks that Admin. run?

I just usually cup them and say "cough".

Virtually, of course.

Chuck Stone

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Don't call out people as trolls/reregs on thread. It's clear flaming. Report the poster/post instead.

I try my best not to report posts because when I do I want it to be taken seriously. I'd imagine there are people constantly running to 'Mammy and Daddy' and, naturally, their complaints have less weight.

This issue presents me with some significant dilemmas in that I don't think.. Mr P should have been banned in the first place so it's not a vendetta - more an attempt to clarify the position of 'the powah' iykwim.

LH Pathe

El Weirdo wrote: »

That's because you're a rucking fetard.

stupid, black kettle thing..

It's because when we return otherwise, it's under a different guise.

manic12

I suspect some mods like to log in as ordinary users just to inflame .
The if they do not like the reply ban them.

g'em

manic12 wrote: »

I suspect some mods like to log in as ordinary users just to inflame .
The if they do not like the reply ban them.

Now is that more or less inflammatory than people who re-reg to get around site-bans?




(user now sitebanned)

Pretty sure I was perma-banned a long time ago..

I think there should be a cap for when the same IP can be used again since so many people start using this site in their teens. Very unfair to ruin their careers as IT professionals when they can't post their network issues on here.

CodyJarrett

Deleted User wrote: »

Pretty sure I was perma-banned a long time ago..

I think there should be a cap for when the same IP can be used again since so many people start using this site in their teens. Very unfair to ruin their careers as IT professionals when they can't post their network issues on here.

I moderate a forum stateside and the days of blocking IPs are over.

We have a few other ways of identifying previously banned users though (none an exact science).

Would one method be a cookie?

CodyJarrett

Deleted User wrote: »

Would one method be a cookie?

Well, bearing in mind Admin here would most likely prefer that their detection methods weren't discussed, I won't divulge too much (not that it's a massively guarded secret or anything) but users give many things away about themselves when (and more precisely how and with what) they access forums.

Be like asking an audience to stand-up and then asking everyone to sit down that wasn't in born June, doesn't have red hair, writes with their left hand and only has three of their own teeth left.

If someone is still standing, chances are that's the same person who had all those characteristics before.

Spear

Deleted User wrote: »

Would one method be a cookie?

Users can just dump a cookie, plus all the cookies and their usage are specified publicly in the privacy policy statement.

seamus

CodyJarrett wrote: »

If someone is still standing, chances are that's the same person who had all those characteristics before.

That's a fairly excellent way of describing it.

The fact is that the kind of people who get banned and re-reg are astonishingly stupid, so they tend to come back and do exactly what they did before and expect to not get caught.

Humans are really good pattern-matching machines (actually we're a bit too good for our own good), so a re-reg can usually be spotted a mile away because he posts in the same way and in all the same forums as he did previously.

The admins have a few other "background" tools that provide them with additional confidence that they've hit on a match but 99% of it starts with, "This guy reminds me a lot of someone..."

especially , when they , write like this ,

Esoteric_

Yeah, I mod a US forum site and the detection methods are easy.

Strange spelling mistakes, similar typing structures, the way they phrase things, which fora in particular the new users frequent.

It's pretty basic if you have the time to look into what the new users are doing.