Hi All,
After reading 3 pages of argument over the issue of multiple nicks, I couldnt help to give my point of view on this issue.
But before I start, I must apologize to Deadpoet and all those who think likewise in his direction as I do not agree with his view. In any case if you are offended, you can have my apologies.
Deadpoet said:
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!
You have the every right to believe that you are correct, but since you are part of this community (Clubsnap), you should respect and obliged to the rules and regulations here to make the experience here for other users and yourself more enjoyable and pleasant.
Every country has its law; every house has its rules and regulations. It is because of these rules and regulations that we can keep the forums in place and order. I used to frequent other forums before I stumble onto Clubsnap, the problem of multiple nicks is wide spread and out of hand in those forums which is rather sad as I would say. Why sad some may ask, it is because you never know whether to trust that person who posts a thread under your post or believe in the Private Message send to you by another user. For all you know, that one person may be saying one thing to you using one nick and saying things about you using another nick. There is an atmosphere of doubts and mistrust.
But ever since I came here, the experience here have been nice in which I see that the moderators and administrators are doing a great job in maintaining it this way.
Deadpoet said:
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.
If you have the issue of alter ego, sorry to say this but please take it on elsewhere then. A name is an identity; a nick is also an identity. You can have multiple names in your life but in one certain group of community, wouldnt you like to be only know by one name.
Let me give you a scenario, X is known as Peter by his army friends and Patrick by his university friends. Then one day out with his army friends, one of Xs university friends happen to stumble onto him and call out to him as Patrick. How will X answer to his army friends as to why he has 2 names and how did it reflect on his character?
As long as you tied these 2 or 3 names to one identity, I dont see a problem because people know you. But in cyberspace, people never see one another, how do we know that this nick and that nick belong to the same person. Or in another case, why do you need multiple nicks and not wanting to be tied to one identity.
Deadpoet said:
Well, good for the few who follow blindly.
People here do not follow blindly. People here respect the decisions, rules and regulations laid down by the moderators and administrators who started this Clubsnap forum. If you enter someone elses house, always respect and follows the house rules.
Deadpoet said:
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.
Let me put you to another scenario, if Clubsnap never implement the need for users to proof worthy of a second nick, then some people will start to abuse this system. There may be people who want multiple nicks not because they want to commit nefarious acts, but because they like it or they want it. However, given you the control and power, can you ensure that you will not abuse it like somebody else does. I believe Clubsnap moderators and administrators will have a hard time to weed out black sheep in the community and the user experience will be rather sad if this rule is not in place at first.
Deadpoet said:
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.
Having many names if not a crime, this I agree. A name is an identity; a nick is also an identity. You can only have one identity, which is the hard fact. As long as your many names point to one identity. I think the administrators and moderators can work something out. I have a suggestion at the end of my post.
Deadpoet said:
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.
Like I mentioned, in a certain community (lets say friends), I believe you are know to them by one name or identity, isnt this true?
Sometime, you cant do things just because you like it. Example, if a person like to walk around his house half naked just because he like it does not means that he can walk around half naked in his friends house. This is the basic courtesy of respecting others decision and house rules.
Deadpoet said:
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.
I believe that it will be better if you can justify why you need or want multiple nicks and let the moderators and administrators decide. If not, I find that all your argument is groundless just because you feel like it. You are trying to blend in the culture here in Clubsnap community, then I suggest you follow the guidelines laid down.
Deadpoet said:
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.
I think your thinking is slightly on the extreme here. The word here is dont drink AND drive. If you drink, can you ensure that you know how to control, when will you know enough is enough so that it will not affect your driving? You can ensure that yourself, but as a community living, what about others who drink and cant control and drive. They pose as a danger to others.
Deadpoet said:
If the members here agree that a big brother monitoring not only what we post, but how many nicks we may have, so be it. But, what should we ban next? Nicks we don't like?
I think that is a good suggestion, but I doubt the administrators and moderators will agree to that. :think: :bsmilie:
Deadpoet said:
But if a person did not commit any misdeed, other than have more than 1 nick, why should their various nicks be merged? Isn't that equates to punishment for having done nothing wrong?
Why are you worried about merging the nicks? This is not a punishment, but more like understanding and showing respect to the rules and regulations here.
Deadpoet said:
I have no need for a second nick.
But if I want one, according to the new rules of the forum I can't. I have not done anything wrong, I have no intention of doing anything bad, but I still cannot have a second nick. Why can't I?
Many would argue that since some people with multiple nicks had committed nefarious acts, so no one should be allowed to have multiple nicks. Well, I will use my drinking and drive analogy again. Since some people drink and drive, cause accidents and endangered others, we should therefore ban drinking and driving! I can no longer drink nor drive becasue some people abuse their right to drink and to drive. But I did not do the abuse, yet I am not allow to drink nor drive. Is that fair?
Rules are meant to be followed, not broken. How will you feel if people enter your house and not respecting your house rules?
Another example, in cinema, some people have the urge to smoke but they cant because of the rules. Why did the rules come about?
1. It is a potential fire hazard.
2. It will cause discomfort to others who dont smoke (user experience)
This is why no smoking in the cinema. Likewise, multiple nicks is a potential for nefarious activities and it tends to cause mistrust in the user experience.
Ok, so much for a long post. Here is my suggestion for a multiple nicks (if needed).
Under the user name,
Deadpoet
Aka ______
Aka ______
Aka ______
_______
Aka Deadpoet
Aka ______
Etc
.
Having to say so much, my stand is clear, I am not condoning multiple nicks may it be for nefarious purpose or not and I hope the moderators and administrators will stand by this point. Please review. Thank you.