Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Sock-Puppetting and the Current Affairs Forum

Options
189101113

Comments

  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,290 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    If someone abandons one account and opens up a new one that will normally not be an issue so long as the poster does not go back to the first one. That's even more relevant now that posters do not yet have the ability to close accounts themselves



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,457 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    If you take a look at the Biden/Trump threads OP messages, most of the bans in there resulted in the poster disappearing and a similar "brand new" poster showing up a few days later. They weren't even site or forums bans, but if they can't bash Biden or laud Trump, what's the point of the site.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I only discovered this thread yesterday and read it all last night

    Its been an eye opener but not surprising

    The McMurphy account said a number of times in the CA threads that he was a long standing mod on the site and the admins will tell you who

    Was that a lie ?

    Was the person behind the McMurphy account a Mod here ?

    Full disclosure: like one or two others in this thread,I am a retired mod here

    One of the reasons I quietly stepped down was because, the mod forum at the time had a sub forum called the reported posts forum

    I thought this was a really bad idea because every reported post generated a thread that all 600 plus mods at the time could see

    Previously only the mods of a forum and admins Could see a report

    I believed because of the number of mods,information was leaking to posters in fora about their posts being reported and who reported them

    It was inevitable

    Does this sub forum still exist ?



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,290 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    The McMurphy account was never a mod. That account was created in 2017.

    I have no idea if they were under a prior existence. If so they would have lost access to reports when they ceased to be a mod.

    All current mods can see all reports. That was also the case on the old platform, although on that platform it was clear which forum specific reports related to as it was stated in the thread title in the reported post forum. The thread title is shown.

    There is no such wording on the new platform and we actually have to guess which reports relate to forums we mod. It's relatively easy for the two of us actively modding CA and Coronavirus forums as reports across those two forums are more voluminous than for any other. Equally I will read reports from a couple of other forums where I know there are no active mods around and indeed will pick up reports of spammers and the like. Indeed it's only reports from forums such as Soccer where there are unlikely to be any spammers and certain other sports forums where I will typically ignore reports as they are very easy to spot



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,476 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    He/she posted under Alf Stewart. prior to the McMurphy/Johnny Dogs account, and as Banjo String for a number of years before that one. No doubt there were others as well



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    I think the poster is confusing accounts.

    There was a mod - For Real or For Reals - of that political persuasion who is still around in a different guise but it is not linked to my knowledge to those accounts.



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,290 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    I've been able to track back around 16 years and am fairly confident the person behind the McMurphy account has not been a mod during that time



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It was a lie so,like so many other things

    I wouldn't blame anyone for looking back thinking they were involved in a farce posting in those CA politics threads

    I certainly do



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,527 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Just for clarification, should we be reporting the, extremely, pro SF users who’ve recently “sprung up” in the SF, or anti-FFG, threads with, previously, dormant accounts and a couple of hundred posts or are the mods and admins checking themselves?

    There are also some fairly new accounts singing from that same hymn sheet. My “concern” with these is that they are sock puppet accounts who managed to avoid the cull.

    The tide is turning…



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,242 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Had a few 'run ins' with McMurphy but it was very obvious that s/he was a SF mouthpiece and best viewed/ ignored in only that way. There's more of them and not just confined to SF, though I reckon they are the most organised in this regard.



  • Advertisement
  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,290 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty




  • Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Thanks for the detail beasty on this. You just got to love political shenanigans.

    Out of interest on the whole system change on accumulated points - does that mean accumulated warnings / infraction points on the old system have effectively vanished into the ether?



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,290 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    Points only lasted for a set period, and they were pretty irrelevant on the old platform. They are much more relevant on the new platform as 5 "active" points result in a system-generated siteban

    But yes, we do not currently have any of the "old" records of yellows, reds and bans against users. I don't know if we'll ever get that back. We do have some discussions which highlighted issues from certain posters, but even they are not so easily searchable

    I've generally taken the approach of assuming a clean slate when applying sanctions since the platform changeover, except in certain cases where posters had proven themselves problems in particular forums which resulted in permanent bans from those forums. If I am aware a poster was permanently banned from a forum I will re-instate that ban if I see them posting there again (for the forums where I have mod responsibilities)



  • Registered Users Posts: 527 ✭✭✭rdwight


    Not sure it stinks but certainly very curious.

    I seem to remember Francie posting that the Feb 2020 election was when the scales fell from his eyes and he voted Sinn Fein for the first time. Now it turns out that he has basically been in the boards.ie equivalent of witness protection because his posting history under his previous identity was such as to draw accusations of being a shinnerbot.



  • Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    From best of my knowledge,his sock-puppeting wasnt even in current affaird forum



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    The current affairs forum didn’t exist back then.

    do you think it matters where he was sock-puppet img?



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,290 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    To be clear FB's sock puppeting was very limited. He is no here to respond to anything so can we drop further discussion of him



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,229 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    Wow.


    I knew it.


    Was banned numerous times for the smallest of things on the SF thread.


    I knew it stank. What a joke.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,527 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    It doesn’t seem to have done much to limit their “presence”. Seems to be a number of, prominent, SF posters, both new and recently dormant, going at it all day and night.

    Not sure there’s much can be done against such a, mobilised, online force.

    The tide is turning…



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The government parties have plenty of them too, who circle the bandwagons to defend every lie, leak, cronyism and lockdown party!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    There have only two incidents of sock-puppetting identified.

    One was quite serious, involving ten accounts over a period of nine months, directly supporting a Sinn Fein agenda. The second was relatively minor in comparison, but involved a long-time SF supporter, who had some minor sock-puppetting around a decade ago.

    Neither of them involved government parties. Take from that what you will.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,476 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    McM and his multiple accounts were only caught out by him using one account to reply to a post addressed to a different account.

    That sparked an investigation by Beasty, and credit to him for then unravelling as much as he did, but it does highlight the worrying point that unless the multi-accounters trip themselves up then there's not really a whole lot happening to prevent it.

    There's a fairly obvious case of a poster who rage-quit with a previous account at the start of last summer, then returned with two accounts later in the year. One of those appears to have stopped posting in the last 2/3 months - but they spent 6 months happily running 2 accounts, sometimes on the same thread, and nothing ever done about it.

    It'll continue ad infitum because those co-ordinating it know exactly how hamstrung the mod/admin teams are in terms of tools available to catch this sort of stuff



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    If a lad is used to spending 17 hours a day on this site, Twitter, and the Journal comments section then a ban is going to hit them hard. Strong chance of a relapse by signing up again.



  • Registered Users Posts: 27,192 ✭✭✭✭blanch152




  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    No i didn't.

    I'm declaring that there are rabid government party supporters posting. I don't see why we should only be wary of those critical or alledged shinners.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    We don't know unless the mod tells us. I do not believe it would only be government critics. Do you?



  • Registered Users Posts: 576 ✭✭✭CrookedJack


    So you've clear evidence of pro-SF sock-puppeting, no evidence of pro-gov sock-puppeting (presumably, otherwise you'd have presented it), and the point you think is important to make is we should be wary of pro-gov actors?



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    what we do know is that the only people caught were SF supporters. While there are no doubt many shills for all parties it is only SF supporters that have been caught sock-puppeting. that is all we do know.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    you're the fifth or sixth poster to muse this on this thread.


    (well- the fifth or sixth login, I guess I should say)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭Brucie Bonus


    So the discussion stops there? No worries. All I know is we still have tag teaming accounts mostly in the SF thread. But they are critical of SF. Lots and lots of people have issues with government policy.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement