Sockies

[Whorty]

Always wondered that myself. I get that some people find them mildly interesting for awhile but if it's from the Gricer stable it always ends the same way, benign posts for awhile, becomes a pain and ends up annoying most on the forum and a long delay before mods finally pull the trigger. The fact they won't pull the trigger early enough means the sockie causes more harm than good. My question would be, if you are going allow them to post while they are interesting why will the mods not get rid the minute it doesn't. Why do you give a sockie the benefit of the doubt? How does that help as it always ends up being banned anyway?

I just don't get why they are allowed full stop. Even if they are entertaining for a bit, why can't the posters stick to their 'real' user IDs rather than having to resort to a sockie.

For me, if someone is banned they are banned for a reason - allowing them to create a sockie and post as that user negates the whole point of banning someone.

Sockies are pushing out good posters/members - do we want to lose good posters just to allow a few idiots to troll.

[northernladyuk]

I just don't get why they are allowed full stop. Even if they are entertaining for a bit, why can't the posters stick to their 'real' user IDs rather than having to resort to a sockie.

For me, if someone is banned they are banned for a reason - allowing them to create a sockie and post as that user negates the whole point of banning someone.

Sockies are pushing out good posters/members - do we want to lose good posters just to allow a few idiots to troll.

Hark at her!

[Old Greg]

I just don't get why they are allowed full stop. Even if they are entertaining for a bit, why can't the posters stick to their 'real' user IDs rather than having to resort to a sockie.

For me, if someone is banned they are banned for a reason - allowing them to create a sockie and post as that user negates the whole point of banning someone.

Sockies are pushing out good posters/members - do we want to lose good posters just to allow a few idiots to troll.

It's not so much the sockies, as the replacement accounts. Take a poster like churchy - vile antisemitic turd by any measure. Permabanned, but then allowed to resurface as Triggenare. It's crappy forum administration.

[wattaj]

It's not so much the sockies, as the replacement accounts. Take a poster like churchy - vile antisemitic turd by any measure. Permabanned, but then allowed to resurface as Triggenare. It's crappy forum administration.

Ok, how would you stop this?

I'll help you out: you can't.

VPNs will hide IPs and people can make up whatever tag they like. The only mitigation is guess work based on the content of posts.

[Old Greg]

Ok, how would you stop this?

I'll help you out: you can't.

VPNs will hide IPs and people can make up whatever tag they like. The only mitigation is guess work based on the content of posts.

I'll help you out: you answered your own question.

Day 1 - you can't stop it. But when it becomes evident, action could be taken, but it isn't.

[wattaj]

I'll help you out: you answered your own question.

Day 1 - you can't stop it. But when it becomes evident, action could be taken, but it isn't.

Your mitigation relies on Sockies being stupid. Well done.

[Whorty]

Hark at her!

[Old Greg]

Your mitigation relies on Sockies being stupid. Well done.

Well it works with Churchy / Triggenare, so you may be right.

[Whorty]

It's not so much the sockies, as the replacement accounts. Take a poster like churchy - vile antisemitic turd by any measure. Permabanned, but then allowed to resurface as Triggenare. It's crappy forum administration.

True ... I kind of think of the new account as a sockie, but you're right - in this case it's a replacement account. If someone is banned then it's for a reason and it does seem strange that the same person can just create a new account and CUK allow that.

[Whorty]

Ok, how would you stop this?

I'll help you out: you can't.

VPNs will hide IPs and people can make up whatever tag they like. The only mitigation is guess work based on the content of posts.

True, but once identified there should be an immediate ban of new account. If a person is permabanned, then surely that ban should continue irrespective of the name they post under? If not, then why ban someone in the first place?