Draconian response to a small problem, here we go again!

[Deadpoet]

Why do we need such draconian response to people with more than one nicks on CS?

Is there no valid justifications? Or is CS not entertaining any valid justifications?

I am not advocting members registering more than one nick for purposes of nefarious intent, but do we need such a sweeping policy? It's like trawl fishing for tuna, it also catches dolphins, sea turtles and other innocents?

And how, may I know, will CS administer and detect this? By IP address? But that does not absolutely means the same person is using two nicks, it may very well be two members sharing the same IP address. We even have husband and wife members on CS, I am sure their IP address is probably the same. Now what, ban both? Or do they need to show CS admin their marriage certificate?

Couple of my photog friends, who happen to be CS members as well, will sometime log onto CS here using my computer. Now what? The same IP address will show multiple nicks loggin on, is CS going to ban me now? I am now going to disallow friends using my computer.

I fully support banning members who post with nefarious intent, with or without multiple nicks. But banning anyone with multiple nicks is like the security guards at shopping malls. Any CSers with a DSLR walking thru the mall is deemed guilty, by the mere fact that he or she is carring a nice camera!

I know, I know, some of you out there will tell me, if I don't like the new policy, I can leave. But I feel a part of this community, and it's my responsibility to speak up, if I feel something is awry. this is my opinion, and I believe I am correct. You may not, but your input is welcome!

 

[Danntbt]

The moderator did qualify that those with valid justification may be granted the privelege of more than one Nick....I would assume if they accept that the nicks belong to more than one person sharing the same IP....then there should be no problem.

 

[Darren]

To clarify, in all of the cases of members being found to have multiple nicks, the second (or alter-nick) nick will be :-
a) Used to garner favorable support for item(s) that the primary nick posts in Buy & Sell ; OR
b) Used to start a flame or personal attack on other member(s).

It may look like a small problem to you from the outside, but we do get very regular notices of doppelgangers via Private Message or email and we deal with it accordingly - its just that we have not (till now) published the nicks of those who have been positively identified as doppelgangers and been de-registered; we may just start doing that to give members a better idea of how widespread this issue really is.

We have many ways to detect doppelgangers (not just by the IP address, otherwise half the nicks here will be red-flagged since ADSL/Cable reassigns IPs dynamically) so rest assured that someone using your PC to access ClubSNAP will not cause your account to be red-flagged.

At the end of the day, there is simply no valid reason for any member to have two nicks*. If someone can come up with a viable, logical and totally valid reason why he/she should maintain two nicks in ClubSNAP, please feel free to voice out here - we are not "draconian" dictators, and will listen to your reasoning if it makes sense.


* The only exception to this (and we have encountered this a few times) is when a member's primary nick is experiencing access problems, and a secondary nick is registered to alert us of the issue. Once the issue is solved, the secondary nick is de-registered.

 

[kahheng]

I applaud the move. Excellent Christmas present!

 

[Francis247]

Couldn't agree more to than. :thumbsup:
Excellent move and clarification.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all Administrators and Moderators of Clubsnap and sub-forums. You all have done an excellent job in keeping this website a pleasant experience. :thumbsup:

Thank you all.

 

[wiz23]

I agree with the Admin fully! :thumbsup: This multiple nick problem has been around for too long ...

 

[Deadpoet]

The key word Darren used was nefarious. Having a second or third nick by itself is not nefarious. How on earth can we assume, someone having an alter ego is nefarious. Many of us here goes by different names, is that nefarious. Slamming and scamming using a second or third nick is nefarious. But the nefarious action is slamming and scamming, not having a second nick.

Well, good for the few who follow blindly. I just wonder, were you ever know by different names? Did anyone try to force you to combine the names, use only one? Or were you ever arrested, accused of a crime, being maltreated because you have more than ONE name? What is happenning here is just that!!!

The more than one nick thing has absolutely no impact on my surfing experience on CS, the Admin can ban this practice, but I still do not see why members had to be so inconvienence to have to proof themselves worthy of a second nick, else get banned.

Anyway, have a Merry Christmas and enjoy a New Year with more rights being eroded!

 

[Zerstorer]

The key word Darren used was nefarious. Having a second or third nick by itself is not nefarious. How on earth can we assume, someone having an alter ego is nefarious. Many of us here goes by different names, is that nefarious. Slamming and scamming using a second or third nick is nefarious. But the nefarious action is slamming and scamming, not having a second nick.

Well, good for the few who follow blindly. I just wonder, were you ever know by different names? Did anyone try to force you to combine the names, use only one? Or were you ever arrested, accused of a crime, being maltreated because you have more than ONE name? What is happenning here is just that!!!

The more than one nick thing has absolutely no impact on my surfing experience on CS, the Admin can ban this practice, but I still do not see why members had to be so inconvienence to have to proof themselves worthy of a second nick, else get banned.

Anyway, have a Merry Christmas and enjoy a New Year with more rights being eroded!

No need to talk so much. Just state a coherent reason why someone would NEED 2 separate nicks if not for nefarious intent?

 

[TrailsofLife]

Actually dude, its a big problem...people can use different nick to fake a buy and sell trap, so they can sell at higher price and cheat innocent CSer....

They can also spread rumour and spams with "support" from their other nick, to make people believe them.

Seriously think its unneccessary to have 2 nicks.

I think CS have made the right move to solve all these problems

 

[zaren]

The key word Darren used was nefarious. Having a second or third nick by itself is not nefarious. How on earth can we assume, someone having an alter ego is nefarious. Many of us here goes by different names, is that nefarious. Slamming and scamming using a second or third nick is nefarious. But the nefarious action is slamming and scamming, not having a second nick.

Well, good for the few who follow blindly. I just wonder, were you ever know by different names? Did anyone try to force you to combine the names, use only one? Or were you ever arrested, accused of a crime, being maltreated because you have more than ONE name? What is happenning here is just that!!!

The more than one nick thing has absolutely no impact on my surfing experience on CS, the Admin can ban this practice, but I still do not see why members had to be so inconvienence to have to proof themselves worthy of a second nick, else get banned.

Anyway, have a Merry Christmas and enjoy a New Year with more rights being eroded!

try telling the police you have two different names under two different IC's/passports.

i'm sure they will not suspect you of any nefarious activity.

after all, you have the right to assume as many different identities as you wish, right?

 

[TrailsofLife]

Rights should be taken away from people who abuse it.

 

[kahheng]

No need to talk so much. Just state a coherent reason why someone would NEED 2 separate nicks if not for nefarious intent?

Yes, precisely. The argument seems to have gone from the "wouldn't this trouble people who use two different userids from the same computer because there are actually more than one real user" to "now what's so wrong with having different userids"?

Why would you personally need more than one nick Mr Deadpoet? I mean it as a serious question.

 

[Deadpoet]

Yes, precisely. The argument seems to have gone from the "wouldn't this trouble people who use two different userids from the same computer because there are actually more than one real user" to "now what's so wrong with having different userids"?

Why would you personally need more than one nick Mr Deadpoet? I mean it as a serious question.

It's not a question of need. What if I have 1,2,3,4 or even 5 nick, have I use it to hurt anyone? Having more than 1 name in itself is not a nefarious activity. I am know as deadpoet here, I am known by another name to my friends in real life, and I have a name I use for my passport, that is quite alright, so, more than one name in itself is not a crime.

If I use multiple nick to bid up prices in buy sell, now that is a nefarious act, and is the only one that matters.

We do a lot of things just becase we want to, and not because we need to. So, by the arguement many put forward here, things we want, if we dont need, we cannot do?

I am not going to argue on need, I am merely pointing out that, multiple nicks in itself is not nefarious. Anyone caught committing nefarious activities, whether they have only one or multiple nicks, should be banned. It's nefarious activities that should be banned, not multiple nicks.

 

[wiz23]

It's not a question of need. What if I have 1,2,3,4 or even 5 nick, have I use it to hurt anyone? Having more than 1 name in itself is not a nefarious activity. I am know as deadpoet here, I am known by another name to my friends in real life, and I have a name I use for my passport, that is quite alright, so, more than one name in itself is not a crime.

If I use multiple nick to bid up prices in buy sell, now that is a nefarious act, and is the only one that matters.

We do a lot of things just becase we want to, and not because we need to. So, by the arguement many put forward here, things we want, if we dont need, we cannot do?

I am not going to argue on need, I am merely pointing out that, multiple nicks in itself is not nefarious. Anyone caught committing nefarious activities, whether they have only one or multiple nicks, should be banned. It's nefarious activities that should be banned, not multiple nicks.

Errr ... If everyone is allowed to do what they want, even if they don't need to, there'll be chaos in this world ... That's why we have rules & laws ...

Having multiple nicks in itself maybe harmless, but due to human nature, it can be used to do harm ... Hence, since it is really NOT necessary for anyone to have multiple nicks, why not just do away with multiple nicks?

 

[kahheng]

It's not a question of need. What if I have 1,2,3,4 or even 5 nick, have I use it to hurt anyone? Having more than 1 name in itself is not a nefarious activity. I am know as deadpoet here, I am known by another name to my friends in real life, and I have a name I use for my passport, that is quite alright, so, more than one name in itself is not a crime.

If I use multiple nick to bid up prices in buy sell, now that is a nefarious act, and is the only one that matters.

We do a lot of things just becase we want to, and not because we need to. So, by the arguement many put forward here, things we want, if we dont need, we cannot do?

I am not going to argue on need, I am merely pointing out that, multiple nicks in itself is not nefarious. Anyone caught committing nefarious activities, whether they have only one or multiple nicks, should be banned. It's nefarious activities that should be banned, not multiple nicks.

But the Admin has actually provided an extremely good justification: that in their experience, looking at hard data, people with more than one nick tend to use them for nefarious purposes. They've apparently seen a strong positive correlation between multiple nicks with wicked deeds from users with multiple nicks.

From your point of view (that a user having more than one nick does not necessarily use other nicks for nasty purposes), you're basically saying that there is a legitimate penalty that good people with multiple nicks will suffer for the worse because of this new rule. You might have a point there.

So the question follows, why would these good people with multiple nicks, who do not use them for evil ways, need multiple nicks in the first place?

Deadpoet, you obviously feel VERY passionately about your point. So why isn't fair to ask you personally, why, in your opinion, you may need more than one nick?

 

[Deadpoet]

For example, I sell on ebay and it's a business, I also buy for personal consumption, I have two seperate accounts on ebay, one for selling and one for buying. Ebay frowned on multiple accounts, but as long as I am not bidding up my own listing, they can doing nothing and will do nothing about my 2 seperate accounts. Some CSers may post their ranting and ravings etc etc with one nick and do their selling with another. What's wrong with that?

It's not the need to have more that one nick. If I want another name, is there anything wrong with it? As I said, I have multiple names in real life, I own up to all of them, I am not hiding, but simply you guys know me as deadpoet, my real life friends know me as something else. I just want another name here on CS, I dont need it, I just feel like it.

If I have to justify multiple nicks based on need, then the whole point is lost. The point is that multiple nicks in itself is not nefarious, and therefore should be be unilaterally banned.

An example. We all know driving drunk is very bad, dangerous and can kill. So, we should go out and ban drinking, and while we are at it, let's ban driving too. Well, I drink and I also drive, but as long as I dont drink and drive, why should I be prohibited from enjoying a drink or two, and not allowed to drive. The act of drinking and the act of driving are not nefarious, but the act of drinking and driving at the same time is. So the law banned drinking and getting drunk while driving, the law did not ban drinking nor driving.

 

[Deadpoet]

Errr ... If everyone is allowed to do what they want, even if they don't need to, there'll be chaos in this world ... That's why we have rules & laws ...

Having multiple nicks in itself maybe harmless, but due to human nature, it can be used to do harm ... Hence, since it is really NOT necessary for anyone to have multiple nicks, why not just do away with multiple nicks?

Knives can be used to kill perople, so, let's ban it.
Car can kill, let's ban driving.
The list of things we do, the list of objects that can be dangerous, and the list of ideas that can cause unrest, and other lists are very long. Are we going to ban all those?

refer to my drinking and driving comment please.

 

[mpenza]

It's not a question of need. What if I have 1,2,3,4 or even 5 nick, have I use it to hurt anyone? Having more than 1 name in itself is not a nefarious activity. I am know as deadpoet here, I am known by another name to my friends in real life, and I have a name I use for my passport, that is quite alright, so, more than one name in itself is not a crime.

Good examples. Note that nicks are not just names, they are identities.

You're not known as more than one person to the same group of friends in real life and you do not have more than passport or IC, so why go to the trouble of having multiple nicks to assume multiple identities in Clubsnap? If you have a special need or want or desire for multiple identities, why not voice out here?

 

[kahheng]

For example, I sell on ebay and it's a business, I also buy for personal consumption, I have two seperate accounts on ebay, one for selling and one for buying. Ebay frowned on multiple accounts, but as long as I am not bidding up my own listing, they can doing nothing and will do nothing about my 2 seperate accounts.

Why do you think Ebay frowns on users with multiple IDs?

Some CSers may post their ranting and ravings etc etc with one nick and do their selling with another. What's wrong with that?

I see. So you're saying that you don't want people to identify the person ranting and raving with the person selling? Or did I read you wrong here? If so, why don't you want people to be able to identify the person ranting and raving with the person selling/buying?

It's not the need to have more that one nick. If I want another name, is there anything wrong with it? As I said, I have multiple names in real life, I own up to all of them, I am not hiding, but simply you guys know me as deadpoet, my real life friends know me as something else. I just want another name here on CS, I dont need it, I just feel like it.

There's nothing inherently wrong with your desire to have more than one name in real life. But I think you're confusing the issue. No one is saying to you that you cannot have more than one name in real life, just not on CS. You don't even have to use your real name on this board, er didn't you know that?

If I have to justify multiple nicks based on need, then the whole point is lost. The point is that multiple nicks in itself is not nefarious, and therefore should be be unilaterally banned.

You do have a point: having multiple nicks doesn't necessarily mean that you're up to no good.

My question to you is: Would you agree that it's ok to ban bad people who use multiple nicks for bad deeds from having more than one nick?

An example. We all know driving drunk is very bad, dangerous and can kill. So, we should go out and ban drinking, and while we are at it, let's ban driving too. Well, I drink and I also drive, but as long as I dont drink and drive, why should I be prohibited from enjoying a drink or two, and not allowed to drive. The act of drinking and the act of driving are not nefarious, but the act of drinking and driving at the same time is. So the law banned drinking and getting drunk while driving, the law did not ban drinking nor driving.

Pardon me, it's probably my own lack of wisdom, but how does your drink-driving analogy apply to the multiple userid issue here?

So,

Drinking = having multiple userids
Driving = ?

 

[mpenza]

Knives can be used to kill perople, so, let's ban it.
Car can kill, let's ban driving.
The list of things we do, the list of objects that can be dangerous, and the list of ideas that can cause unrest, and other lists are very long. Are we going to ban all those?

refer to my drinking and driving comment please.

Some things (e.g. drugs and firearms) are banned, some things are not if they serve useful purpose. Darren has made it clear that the Admins are willing to listen to reasoning and I think that's fair enough.