MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
April 25th, 2011 at 10:10:10 PM permalink
Quote: teddys

Altut has been suspended for a personal insult he posted in a comment here.


According to the Wizard's list, that's only a 3-day suspension. Why wasn't he suspended permanently for violating forum rule #11 (no multi-accounting)?
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
teddys
teddys
Joined: Nov 14, 2009
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 5444
April 25th, 2011 at 10:17:07 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

Quote: teddys

Altut has been suspended for a personal insult he posted in a comment here.


According to the Wizard's list, that's only a 3-day suspension. Why wasn't he suspended permanently for violating forum rule #11 (no multi-accounting)?

We're not quite sure what the standard is for proof of multi-accounting. Apparently, it might be beyond a reasonable doubt, which is more than multi-accounters deserve.

In my opinion, it should be preponderance of the evidence, which Altut/Logan/Singer certainly meets.

I really don't think a case needs to be made when it's this painfully obvious, however.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1360
  • Posts: 22564
April 25th, 2011 at 10:48:14 PM permalink
Quote: teddys

We're not quite sure what the standard is for proof of multi-accounting. Apparently, it might be beyond a reasonable doubt, which is more than multi-accounters deserve.



It is. I know that tends to protect the guilty, but I'd rather do that than punish the innocent.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
April 26th, 2011 at 7:01:29 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

It is. I know that tends to protect the guilty, but I'd rather do that than punish the innocent.


But "reasonable doubt" only needs to be from one person's perspective -- yours. You have access to IP logs, browser caps, and other technical details. Are you suggesting that JerryLogan, JL2, helicious, and Altut all used separate computers on different IP hosting accounts? Jerry *admitted* he was JL2 and helicious, after all.

It's your party, but letting Jerry change his screen name and keep posting (about the same tired old accusations, no less) seems contrary to both rules 11 and 12 of your own rules.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
kenarman
kenarman
Joined: Nov 22, 2009
  • Threads: 28
  • Posts: 966
April 26th, 2011 at 7:46:38 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

But "reasonable doubt" only needs to be from one person's perspective -- yours. You have access to IP logs, browser caps, and other technical details. Are you suggesting that JerryLogan, JL2, helicious, and Altut all used separate computers on different IP hosting accounts? Jerry *admitted* he was JL2 and helicious, after all.

It's your party, but letting Jerry change his screen name and keep posting (about the same tired old accusations, no less) seems contrary to both rules 11 and 12 of your own rules.



The USA is supposed to be the land of the free. This means that everyone gets to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I think the Wiz is doing a remarkable job in being fair to everyone on this site.

I also think that 2 flags is not enough to remove a post. If we want to take our lead from common law everyone has the right to be judged by 12 of his peers.
Be careful when you follow the masses, the M is sometimes silent.
kp
kp
Joined: Feb 28, 2011
  • Threads: 7
  • Posts: 422
April 26th, 2011 at 7:57:34 AM permalink
Quote: teddys

Altut has been suspended for a personal insult he posted in a comment here.


And that's the system at work. Better to let the guy hang himself rather than following behind him and destroying the evidence of any wrong doing.
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7209
April 26th, 2011 at 7:58:23 AM permalink
Quote: kenarman


I also think that 2 flags is not enough to remove a post. If we want to take our lead from common law everyone has the right to be judged by 12 of his peers.



...And what if those "12" peers are all the same guy? To me, the problem is a little different when the issue at hand is that the same person is using multiple accounts to troll the board and insult people.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
kenarman
kenarman
Joined: Nov 22, 2009
  • Threads: 28
  • Posts: 966
April 26th, 2011 at 8:04:28 AM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

...And what if those "12" peers are all the same guy? To me, the problem is a little different when the issue at hand is that the same person is using multiple accounts to troll the board and insult people.



I have no problem being one of 12 and flagging an unacceptable post(s) but I don't think that immediately flagging everything a specific member has posted regardless of content is the way to go.
Be careful when you follow the masses, the M is sometimes silent.
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7209
April 26th, 2011 at 8:10:17 AM permalink
Quote: kenarman

I have no problem being one of 12 and flagging an unacceptable post(s) but I don't think that immediately flagging everything a specific member has posted regardless of content is the way to go.



Even if that person has already been banned 3 times for being an asshat?
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
April 26th, 2011 at 8:15:04 AM permalink
Quote: kenarman

The USA is supposed to be the land of the free. This means that everyone gets to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I think the Wiz is doing a remarkable job in being fair to everyone on this site.


The Internet is not "the USA" and this is not a court of law. If the Wizard wants to ban someone "just because", he gets to. It's his website. But that's beside the point, which is that the Wizard already did ban JerryLogan. He returned anyway, multiple times, using different screen names. At this point, it's a question of technology, not of policy. The forum rules are very clear on this point -- signing up under multiple accounts is grounds for immediate expulsion. Given that Jerry (a) was banned for life, (b) admitted to signing up under multiple accounts, and (c) in spite of those points is still being allowed to post here, I'm simply questioning the technology backend which seems to be hampering the Wizard's implementation of his own rules.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563

  • Jump to: