# OldEdScott and multiple personas



## gregg (Oct 30, 2000)

FYI all, here is the PM conversation between Ed and me. (read latest at the top)

BTW, the jury is still out on M.J., but if you guys see any violations by him, please let me know.

-g


********************************
Thanks for the reply and compliance Ed, I figured you'd know where I was coming from.

It's not a new rule, persay, but it one that we've had increasing troubles with as of late. In fact, the multiple personality problem has been so bad on our Politics forum on MTBR, we enabled a feature that makes the IP addresses of all posters visible to everyone. I prefer to leave this turned off, but if necessary we will role it out here too.

Humor and/or sarcasm is a very subtle thing on the 'net, and not all things come across as such, to all people. So, regardless of the intentions, it's the moderators' and my job to respond to complaints. 

Thanks again,

-g




OldEdScott said:


> Hey Greg-- I've read the Forum Guidelines on numerous occasions over the years, and never until this very moment seen the prohibition on mulitple handles. Is this new? Regardless, since it is a rule, I will certainly abide by it.
> 
> As far as my 'alternate' posts being reported as 'violations,' all I can say is ... sigh. They are so CLEARLY intended as humor and to lampoon certain excesses of the board that I cannot imagine anyone taking them seriously enough to 'report' them, nor board administrators taking the 'reports' seriously enough to warn me about them.
> 
> ...





gregg said:


> Hello Ed,
> 
> This is a warning about posting under multiple handles, which is not allowed.
> 
> ...


*******************************


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Cool. 

Gregg- maybe we need to post a short and sweet list of Politics Only guidelines, as it seems we have been getting an increasing amount of reported posts from that forum. We could even post them as "draft" and get feedback from the members before finalizing them. While a light touch is good- its getting to be the Wild West in there lately based on some of the reported post threads I reviewed lately. 

I would suggest something along the lines of:

1. One handle per person.
2. Its fine to attack someone's position, not fine to attack the poster themselves. Also no threats of any kind are allowed. 
3. Sarcasm is fine, but calling someone "a dim-witted mouth breathing idiot" ect is not really sarcasm. 
4. No offensive photo's or animations (a problem as of late with several reported posts regarding a certain poster) as many people view this site from work. 
5. Respect other's copyright- its ok to quote and link- not ok to repost the entire article. 

Many forum sites use variations of these as the basics. Any way- that's just my suggestion FWIW. 

Thanks- Eric


----------



## gregg (Oct 30, 2000)

Thanks for the excellent outline, Eric. I will probably post that as a sticky for a few days in the Politics forum tomorrow. 

As to the repeat offender on the images....who is it? It may be time for me to send them a personal reminder.

-g


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Poster: *AJS*

Here is the text of the second PM I sent him, and his reply, after another of his posts was reported:



> You've GOT to be kidding! What's the problem now? The little guy showing the "moon", or the one shooting? We see much worse than that every night on prime-time network TV.
> 
> Why don't you do us all a favor Coolhand and ask these whiners to knock it off? Really, don't you think this is going too far with it?
> 
> ...


----------



## haiku d'etat (Apr 28, 2001)

E, i wouldn't take that from him. sounds like time to put the smack down.

G, any progress on the electronic slap you've been working on?


----------



## gregg (Oct 30, 2000)

Hmmm...I don't suppose you happened to save a copy of those smilies somewhere?

-g

(and yeah, I agree with Jeff, this guys attitude is pushing it.)


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

He was worse earlier when I had to fix another reported post he made with those insipid thrid party smilies:



> Originally Posted by AJS
> 
> 
> So who is it doing the complaining Coolhand, the Bush supporters on the site that disagree with the Democrats?? The ones that don't want the truth to be known about the election fraud??
> ...


Here is more handywork/smiley abuse from him:

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=19564


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

Coolhand said:


> He was worse earlier when I had to fix another reported post he made with those insipid thrid party smilies:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting. That is the first time I had Symantec Web security block a RBR post. It said the post contained prohibited words.... I'll read it at home tonight...


----------



## gregg (Oct 30, 2000)

Hmmm...based on that smiley, that's not a big deal. But, I didn't see the other ones.

Regardless, his 'tude still needs to be kept in check.

Thanks for the post.

-g


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

gregg said:


> Hmmm...based on that smiley, that's not a big deal. But, I didn't see the other ones.
> 
> Regardless, his 'tude still needs to be kept in check.
> 
> ...


Yep, he's a charmer. 

 

None of the complained about smilies which were deleted were used again. I went looking for a while through his other posts for an example of the smiles which were complained about without luck.


----------



## gregg (Oct 30, 2000)

"None of the complained about smilies which were deleted were used again."

That's a good sign! Means he's gettin' the hint, but still likes to "push the envelope" if he can.

At this point, he should know what flies and what won't.

-g


----------

