nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Sock-Puppetting and the Current Affairs Forum

blanch152

There is a quite extraordinary set of posts (#11301 and #11305) on the Sinn Fein thread in the Current Affairs forum where the mod Beasty outs a set of at least ten accounts that have been engaged in sock-puppeting for nearly a year on the Forum. Firstly, well done to the mods for the work that must have been done to flush out this user. However, there are a number of questions that arise.

(1) How did it take so long to spot this sock-puppetting? These were prolific posters across a number of threads and came to the attention of the mods on more than one occasion. The McMurphy account in particular has been active for many years in various guises, is it only the last year that it has been engaged in this activity? Over the years, posters have been reassured by statements in the old Prison forum that Boards had a full set of tools to root out such activity. Have these tools been lost during the changeover, or is it just the lack of mods and the changeover that was exploited by this particular user? If there has been a loss of ability to detect such sock-puppetters, it would be useful to alert users to this now so that vigilance can be exercised to ensure it doesn't happen again. On that point, how can we be certain that all have been caught?

(2) The mod post concludes that there is nothing at this stage to suggest this was anything more than one individual looking to use this site for their personal political purposes. Is there evidence this is the case? The accounts combined pursued a singular political party line, a party that has openly recruited for online supporters and openly encouraged its members at election time to pretend they were from a fake polling company. How can Boards be certain that it hasn't been played by someone acting on behalf of this political party?

(3) Usernames. This issue isn't just related to this particular sock-puppetting, but might be worth raising. The character McMurphy in the book One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest has a very misogynist aspect (this doesn't come out as clearly in the movie). While I am all for freedom of expression, we have seen other usernames in the past with homophobic, racist and misogynist undertones. Is there a boards policy on usernames, or should there be one? There are a couple of examples still around that are somewhat dodgy. The borderline between low-level racism and ignorance is a thin one and difficult to police, but I would be interested to know.

(4) Given that the modus operandi of this sock-puppetting operation appears to have been to pursue a particular political agenda in an aggressive way and also target other posters, will there be a review of actions taken against other posters as a result of interaction with this person. I am certain that there are users who have been sanctioned, threadbanned or forum-banned as a result of interaction with one of these accounts, and then reported just by the other ones. Taking one for the team in order to bring another poster down with them in other words.

Again, well done to the mods, and in accordance with the instruction in the posts, I haven't raised these issues in the thread but taken them to Feedback to consider some of the general issues that have been raised by this incident.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434751#Comment_118434751

A search for sock puppeting shows that sock puppeting takes place across the site. It happens everywhere on forums and social media blanch.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433958#Comment_118433958

So there weren't identical calls for activism by other political parties. Thanks for acknowledging that you were wrong.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434713#Comment_118434713

The poster making allegations of others possibly being up to sock-puppetting is you:

We should be just as suspicious of pile-ons from parties that have endorsed/suggested anonymous accounts to promote their party.

General wariness is required from mods therefore.

Hiding your accusations in a veiled generalisation is all you are doing.

Facts are that a SF-supporting sock-puppetting operation has been outed. That requires wariness for a repeat as it is probable, given the duration and extent of the operation, that another attempt by the person/entity behind it will be made. End of.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434659#Comment_118434659

The 'focus' should be left to the mods and not a cohort who support FG to the hilt.

Needs a direction now from Mods on what is allowed going forward. You guys would happily make the place intolerable, god knows how many times the 'shinnerbot' nonsense has been used by you up to now to deflect and tar.

I'll leave it with the mods now.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434275#Comment_118434275

Don't expect logic in the arguments put forward by SF supporters.

You are correct. The only incidence of sock-puppetry that is known is one directed towards favouring the interests of Sinn Fein. The mods says that it is incredibly rate, meaning the likelihood is that SF is the only party to have benefitted on here from it.

What I would surmise though is that the person or entity behind the McMurphy sock-puppetting won't go away too easily. Over ten years invested in the good fight is such that they are likely to try again. EmmetSpiceland is correct to state that the focus now should be on new members coming in and suppprting SF to the hilt, or old, dormant, accounts suddenly waking up and mobilising under the SF banner. That is where the risk of the resurrection of McMurphy presents.

If there is a deflection campaign on here, it is one designed to reduce the embarrassment caused to Sinn Fein and deflect away from what has happened. Those who try and tar others with the sins of a SF-supporting poster should be ashamed of themselves, especially those who claim to be a victim of such tarring.

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434302#Comment_118434302

Fair enough, I'll put the handbags away!

Chips Lovell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434337#Comment_118434337

He was a serial troublemaker who was probably lucky not to get sitebanned before this. But that's not to say he was a serial sockpuppeteer. It's never been that hard to uncover. It's likely more a case that he thought he could get away with it now given the disruption caused by migrating from one platform to another. He didn't.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434337#Comment_118434337

Do we know when the 2nd account was opened and how long it was going on? Didn't see that mentioned but I could be wrong

EmmetSpiceland

CA can’t be shut down, it would destroy After Hours. There’s already a number of CA “staging posts” in the forum, as well a number of unsavoury posters, but, for the most part, CA draws most of them away.

Phoebas

"Two mods have now said that sock puppeting is incredibly rare but we have a cohort calling the troops in to enact a strategy. Gas altogether and spells a further downward spiral of these forums if allowed to carry on."

McMurphy was a prolific poster on here for upwards of 10 years in different guises. Maybe we are to accept that the c. 10 accounts that were associated with him were relatively new and that prior to those accounts being operated, McMurphy was operating strictly according to the rules. That seems unlikely to me.

It's more likely that sock puppeting is just difficult to detect, or isn't proactively investigated. It's hard to accept a claim that it's' incredibly rare' when it went undetected by this poster for so long.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434275#Comment_118434275

Sock puttery has not been proven to be promoted by any 'party' here. Individuals have had sock puppet accounts.

If you know anymore then tell us and back it up.

Of course we should be generally wary, that is best practice.

Setting up a nice handy little deflection campaign is the issue here. And there are those here trying to call in the troops to do that. Some of the same cohort that got me investigated yesterday. If that is going to be tolerated everytime this cohort fancy and is the future - then we might as well shut down CA and boards now.

CrookedJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433882#Comment_118433882

Reasonable point, on rereading it seems like i'm directing mods i've removed that bit.

CrookedJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434150#Comment_118434150

So on one hand we should be generally wary because all political parties might be sock puppets, but also we shouldn't worry about the pro-SF sock-puppets as mods say it's incredibly rare? That's just logically inconsistent.

The fact that mods say sock-puppeting is incredibly rare undercuts your point that other political entities are doing it. Again the only evidence we have of sock-puppeting in support of a political party is this one and it's for Sinn Fein. A refusal to properly acknowledge this, to turn it into an "All sides do it" argument or to somehow imply that the concern is that other pro-sf posters will be tarred with the same brush, just completely removes any moral validity to points being made.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118434016#Comment_118434016

The only people I view/or call out as FG or FF supporters are those who broach zero criticism of them.

I have been first on here to criticise SF on several issues and only defend them on the broader republican issues and some policy issues and as the best chance we have to effect a change to the power swap.

Yet I endured the pile-on yesterday about being a shinnerbot,(no doubt in my mind that will be trawled up again just like other slurs) a supporter of children killers and abusers etc etc etc. Routine pile-ons here from people who again, broach no criticism of either FG or FF or both nor the present coalition government.

Two mods have now said that sock puppeting is incredibly rare but we have a cohort calling the troops in to enact a strategy. Gas altogether and spells a further downward spiral of these forums if allowed to carry on.

EmmetSpiceland

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433850#Comment_118433850

General wariness is too “broad”. The focus now should be on new members coming in and suppprting SF to the hilt, or old, dormant, accounts suddenly waking up and mobilising under the SF banner.

As I’ve said previously, this has tainted the SF “argument” on here. No one will be interested in arguing with, potential, sock puppets swarming threads.

The idea that other, more normal, parties are using sock puppets on here just doesn’t “stack up”. The numbers just aren’t there.

Obviously, shinners will argue otherwise but the fundamental “problem”, there, is that they view anyone who doesn’t agree with SF as FG supporters, or FFG at least.

Chips Lovell

I think it's important to not get carried away here. Having modded the Politics Cafe and more recently Politics, I can assure people that sockpuppeting is incredibly rare. Of the many ways people choose to act the maggot, this is very low down on the list. If you use this incident to conclude that any case of multiple posters adopting the same viewpoint is evidence of sockpuppeting, then you're making the wrong inference. One swallow doesn't make a summer.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433891#Comment_118433891

Correct, FG called specifically for 'anonymous' posters to promote the party. SF openly called for supporters to be active online - nothing wrong with that IMO

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433931#Comment_118433931

We don't have any evidence of political sock-puppetting except in one instance - the McMurphy one.

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433879#Comment_118433879

I've agreed with you on the sock puppeting accounts held by that poster, I've agreed that increased vigilance would be beneficial, and stated I'll be doing so myself.

What the bejaysus does this have to do with FG bots, Blanch?!

My point stands; I've been accused of being a Shinnerbot on more than one occasion myself.....from our interactions on here, I'm sure you'll agree it is patently nonsense.

Letting threads devolve into accusations of, 'Shinnerbot' or, 'Sock Puppets' any time a handful of posters disagree with you, well that's just going to shut down any discussion.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433850#Comment_118433850

You went through over 10k posts many of which just state a poster was banned? Okie doke.

A poster had sock puppet accounts, that is all we know, we also know many many different types of posters have sock puppet accounts.

General wariness is the order of the day therefore. But as I said earlier, it doesn't particularly bother me if they are only giving opinions.

I take opinions as they come and answer them. As we have also seen, pile-ons happen and come from all quarters.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432609#Comment_118432609

No, identical calls for online activism have not been made by other parties.

There was a poster, ironically McMurphy, who used to produce an old picture of FG hacks with computers as back-up for this claim. Do you think he was right?

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433110#Comment_118433110

As one of the posters who commented on the pile on happening (though without discussing anything specific about it, just pointing out that it was in poor taste), I don't believe I went against any mod warning on thread in doing so.

If you find my distaste towards what happened yesterday so egregious and feel I've misread the mod warning, you can report my second most recent post before this and we can get a mod to give a definitive yes or no and put it to bed?

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432876#Comment_118432876

That problem hasn't been created by other posters, it has been created by a sock-puppetting Shinnerbot by the name of McMurphy.

Now, if someone wants to advance the conspiracy theory that McMurphy was really a FG-bot, and spent nine months operating multiple accounts criticising FG and Leo, while lavishing praise on SF, before deliberately slipping up, all as a reason to throw mud at SF-supporting posters, please go ahead.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433143#Comment_118433143

There is no evidence of non-SF sock puppets on these boards. I have looked and I can't find any.

If there is evidence, if I am wrong, produce it. If you can't produce it, stop wittering on about it as you have nothing to stand on.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118433110#Comment_118433110

How do you know there is no evidence of 'non SF sock puppets' have all the sock puppet accounts been pro SF ones...can you evidence this?

I am not defending myself here, as there is no need. I am merely pointing to what happened yesterday. If you wish to say it didn't happen, fire away and good luck with that.

CrookedJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432963#Comment_118432963

As there is no evidence of non-SF sock-puppeting i think its more reasonable to be suspicious of pro-SF posts, especially ones that are made by multiple accounts by the same user. I think trying to turn that into a "be suspicious of everyone" motif is disingenuous. Especially in a thread where you've managed to make yourself above criticism.

I would also point out to yourself (and Beasty as the gatekeeper) that repeatedly referring to a "Pile-on" from posters in this thread is not defending yourself and is hardly fair when said posters are prohibited from answering directly.

edit: might've slipped into mod directing there. Withdrawn.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432792#Comment_118432792

The leader of one of the government parties has called for anonymous accounts to promote the party, that is evidence that there are no scruples about doing it.

But as Fionn says, this is already being used to pile-on by a cohort - witness what happened to me yesterday.

General wariness should be the message here, I was happy to be investigated.

Fionn1952

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432393#Comment_118432393

Specifically

Given what has happened with this particular sock-puppetting account, there is more than enough reason for boards to be wary in future of SF pile-ons, whether that is on a particular issue, or directed towards a particular poster.

Doesn't sound like bad advice on the surface, and I'll certainly be keeping a closer eye out for it myself. My concern would be that it becomes even more of a deflectionary tactic; a few posters with an already existing tendency to wail, 'Shinnerbot' at any disagreement with them could completely derail any conversation.

God forbid, two people happen to disagree with them....the accusations of sock puppetting will be rampant to go along with the Shinnerbot ones.

Beasty

No discussion of threadbans. That is not what this thread is for.

CrookedJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118432609#Comment_118432609

Not equally suspicious, no, as we've just discovered a pro-SF collection of sock-puppets. So we have definitive proof of "Shinnerbot" activity, paid or unpaid. It's there, inescapable, it's the subject of this thread. There is no equivalent evidence of sock-puppeting activity from other political entities. So we should be more suspicious of pro-SF pile-ons, obviously. It would be disingenuous to say otherwise. Suspiciously so.