[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Isn't...isn't that what happens now? Right now?

Exactly. Depending on all users to be completely adult about these issues hasn't worked. Ever. So we try to be a bit more effective in dealing with the issue before we have to ban, unless it's something like a multiply banned user being confused as to why he's been banned again...

[NoIdeaWhatIsGoingOn]

Well, I'm always going to say that SUV owners are pieces of shit, as it's proven fact.

"Have you ever wondered why sport utility vehicle drivers seem like such
assholes? Surely it's no coincidence that Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the
Dem-ocratic National Committee, tours Washington in one of the biggest SUVs
on the market, the Cadillac Escalade, or that Jesse Ventura loves the
Lincoln Navigator. Well, according to New York Times reporter Keith
Bradsher's new book, High and Mighty, the connection between the two isn't a
coincidence. Unlike any other vehicle before it, the SUV is the car of
choice for the nation's most self-centered people; and the bigger the SUV,
the more of a jerk its driver is likely to be.

According to market research conducted by the country's leading automakers,
Bradsher reports, SUV buyers tend to be insecure and vain. They are
frequently nervous about their marriages and uncomfortable about parenthood.
They often lack confidence in their driving skills. Above all, they are apt
to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their
neighbors and communities. They are more restless, more sybaritic, and less
social than most Americans are. They tend to like fine restaurants a lot
more than off-road driving, seldom go to church and have limited interest in
doing volunteer work to help others.

SUV drivers generally don't care about anyone else's kids but their own, are
very concerned with how other people see them rather than with what's
practical, and they tend to want to control or have control over the people
around them. David Bostwick, Chrysler's market research director, tells
Bradsher, 'If you have a sport utility, you can have the smoked windows, put
the children in the back and pretend you're still single.'

Armed with such research, automakers have, over the past decade, ramped up
their SUV designs to appeal even more to the "reptilian" instincts of the
many Americans who are attracted to SUVs not because of their perceived
safety, but for their obvious aggressiveness."

- Answer : "Reptilian" SUV Owner - page 2

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by NoIdeaWhatIsGoingOn 

Well, I'm always going to say that SUV owners are pieces of shit, as it's proven fact.

And you're always going to keep getting banned for being an asshole about it.

Is your time worth so little that you presume to waste the moderators' time over obstinate buffoonery for DECADES?

[Laminar]

A self-centered, self-absorbed, sybaritic jerk who's nervous about his marriage, carries a disdain for and tries to control those around him, and doesn't go to church??

You're right, I can't imagine ever wanting to spend any amount of time around someone like that.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by NoIdeaWhatIsGoingOn 

Well, I'm always going to say that SUV owners are pieces of shit, as it's proven fact.

"Have you ever wondered why sport utility vehicle drivers seem like such
assholes? Surely it's no coincidence that Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the
Dem-ocratic National Committee, tours Washington in one of the biggest SUVs
on the market, the Cadillac Escalade, or that Jesse Ventura loves the
Lincoln Navigator. Well, according to New York Times reporter Keith
Bradsher's new book, High and Mighty, the connection between the two isn't a
coincidence. Unlike any other vehicle before it, the SUV is the car of
choice for the nation's most self-centered people; and the bigger the SUV,
the more of a jerk its driver is likely to be.

According to market research conducted by the country's leading automakers,
Bradsher reports, SUV buyers tend to be insecure and vain. They are
frequently nervous about their marriages and uncomfortable about parenthood.
They often lack confidence in their driving skills. Above all, they are apt
to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their
neighbors and communities. They are more restless, more sybaritic, and less
social than most Americans are. They tend to like fine restaurants a lot
more than off-road driving, seldom go to church and have limited interest in
doing volunteer work to help others.

SUV drivers generally don't care about anyone else's kids but their own, are
very concerned with how other people see them rather than with what's
practical, and they tend to want to control or have control over the people
around them. David Bostwick, Chrysler's market research director, tells
Bradsher, 'If you have a sport utility, you can have the smoked windows, put
the children in the back and pretend you're still single.'

Armed with such research, automakers have, over the past decade, ramped up
their SUV designs to appeal even more to the "reptilian" instincts of the
many Americans who are attracted to SUVs not because of their perceived
safety, but for their obvious aggressiveness."

- Answer : "Reptilian" SUV Owner - page 2

All those things are true of most sports car drivers too, here's your mirror. They're mostly obnoxious, self-absorbed d-bags. (I'm aware of the irony of that statement.)

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

All those things are true of most sports car drivers too, here's your mirror. They're mostly obnoxious, self-absorbed d-bags. (I'm aware of the irony of that statement.)

Also, people

[auto_immune]

This thread delivers!

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by NoIdeaWhatIsGoingOn 

Well, I'm always going to say that SUV owners are pieces of shit, as it's proven fact.

"Have you ever wondered why sport utility vehicle drivers seem like such
assholes? Surely it's no coincidence that Terry McAuliffe, chairman of the
Dem-ocratic National Committee, tours Washington in one of the biggest SUVs
on the market, the Cadillac Escalade, or that Jesse Ventura loves the
Lincoln Navigator. Well, according to New York Times reporter Keith
Bradsher's new book, High and Mighty, the connection between the two isn't a
coincidence. Unlike any other vehicle before it, the SUV is the car of
choice for the nation's most self-centered people; and the bigger the SUV,
the more of a jerk its driver is likely to be.

According to market research conducted by the country's leading automakers,
Bradsher reports, SUV buyers tend to be insecure and vain. They are
frequently nervous about their marriages and uncomfortable about parenthood.
They often lack confidence in their driving skills. Above all, they are apt
to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their
neighbors and communities. They are more restless, more sybaritic, and less
social than most Americans are. They tend to like fine restaurants a lot
more than off-road driving, seldom go to church and have limited interest in
doing volunteer work to help others.

SUV drivers generally don't care about anyone else's kids but their own, are
very concerned with how other people see them rather than with what's
practical, and they tend to want to control or have control over the people
around them. David Bostwick, Chrysler's market research director, tells
Bradsher, 'If you have a sport utility, you can have the smoked windows, put
the children in the back and pretend you're still single.'

Armed with such research, automakers have, over the past decade, ramped up
their SUV designs to appeal even more to the "reptilian" instincts of the
many Americans who are attracted to SUVs not because of their perceived
safety, but for their obvious aggressiveness."

- Answer : "Reptilian" SUV Owner - page 2

Well, judging from your posting style in light of the above...

How long have you been driving a Sherman tank?

[Shaddim]

Freudling is ignoring his ban (theothersteve), shouldn't he be booted? If I had to choose between them, I'd rather have Rob.

[Spheric Harlot]

Freudling actually contributed posts of substance in the publishing threads for a while (though I'll need to completely reexamine those, now that it's clear that it was him and we know his fantasy approach to arguing).

But an Apple presentation triggered the same old paranoid delusion he got kicked for several times in the past...it's like the SUV trigger for Rob.

[ghporter]

I don't think there is any conclusive indication that theothersteve is an old, banned member. This member is irritating to many, but it doesn't seem to be the case that he's a MacNN experienced irritating person. As Spheric Harlot pointed out, freudling had real content to share rather more often than simply being a jerk to other members. I'll leave that here as a counter-example...

[besson3c]

If you really want people like freudling to go away the worst thing you could do would be to ban him and do the whole witch hunt thing. For most people this just sparks them.

[Laminar]

I'm curious what you think an effective solution would be, and why you think MacNN hasn't implemented that solution.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

I don't think there is any conclusive indication that theothersteve is an old, banned member. This member is irritating to many, but it doesn't seem to be the case that he's a MacNN experienced irritating person. As Spheric Harlot pointed out, freudling had real content to share rather more often than simply being a jerk to other members. I'll leave that here as a counter-example...

Actually, he contributed as theothersteve.

The publishing thing was what brought him back.

Freudling had brief spells of coherent content, as well.

[Laminar]

Yeah, he started on the ebook stuff but couldn't help himself when he saw all of us hopeless Apple fanboys swallowing the blue pill offered by our fruity overlords.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I'm curious what you think an effective solution would be, and why you think MacNN hasn't implemented that solution.

I don't think MacNN can implement something that will work for everybody, but I think the best solution is not to empower people that bother you, and just to ignore them. We can't shape the internet to smooth over the parts of it we don't like.

[Laminar]

So your solution is for everyone to suddenly develop self control and begin acting like adults?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

So your solution is for everyone to suddenly develop self control and begin acting like adults?

It's not an attainable solution, but what other choice do we have? You ban somebody that doesn't want to be banned and they create an alt, other people defend that person and express annoyance at MacNN for banning that individual, they are called nazis, others pipe in by saying how much that person sucked, we get threads about how MacNN is dying, etc.

Something tells me you have a response queued up about how I don't behave like an adult?

[Laminar]

Good call. Thought about it at first, but considering how the tables seemed to have turned against me lately, decided not to.

Are you familiar with methods employed by forum software to deal with "trolls"? There are a few solutions:
1. Shadow banning - the banned user is allowed to read and post, but no one sees those posts. Works until the banned checks the forums as a different user and sees those posts missing.
2. Hell-banning - the forum intentionally loses the troll's posts upon submission, errors out 10-90% of the time, basically makes it seem like the forum server is unreliable, but only to the troll
3. Swift deletion. Remove all of the user's posts so that the disturbance is minimized. If the posts have no direct lasting consequences and the number of people that actually see those posts is few, there's little motivation to continue creating new email addresses, connecting to new proxy servers, signing up for new forum accounts, verifying, and getting a couple posts in before deletion.

This is coming from someone that's perma-banned on at least two reasonably active forums.

[Shaddim]

Speaking of funky IPs, would an admin tell me where mine is from?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Speaking of funky IPs, would an admin tell me where mine is from?

What Is My IP Address? Lookup IP, Hide IP, Change IP, Trace IP and more...

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Speaking of funky IPs, would an admin tell me where mine is from?

Yes and no: we can do IP lookup, but it's not always 100 % reliable (e. g. you can mask your IP if you wanted to). Then there is the problem that sometimes multiple (distinct) members have shared IPs or IP ranges. But usually it's a good guess that if two nicks share one or especially several IPs, they are in fact the same user.

But don't worry, Shaddim, we have better things to do than to look up IPs of our members, we're not the NSA (Although if the NSA were to ask, I reckon we'd have to hand over your IP address to them and not be allowed to tell anyone about it. I hope you're not a terrorist or communist )

[reader50]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Speaking of funky IPs, would an admin tell me where mine is from?

PM sent.

The NSL rules apply only if you've received one.

As of this time, I have not received any government requests for data.

It has been suggested businesses could all post the above message (if possible) along with advice to check the sign each day. If the sign vanishes, the public can draw their own conclusions.

[Shaddim]

Currently I'm in "Denver", but everyone here in "Denver" is speaking with a decidedly non-American accent. How odd.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Currently I'm in "Denver", but everyone here in "Denver" is speaking with a decidedly non-American accent. How odd.

Do they like hot dogs and baseball and freedom?

[Shaddim]

I think they'll eat anything in a sausage casing, and being an Arsenal fan isn't going to be doing me any favours. They have more pressing needs than freedom, like modern dentistry.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I think they'll eat anything in a sausage casing, and being an Arsenal fan isn't going to be doing me any favours. They have more pressing needs than freedom, like modern dentistry.

I think I know where you are!

What did Denis Rodman say to you to convince you to travel to North Korea?

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Freudling actually contributed posts of substance in the publishing threads for a while (though I'll need to completely reexamine those, now that it's clear that it was him and we know his fantasy approach to arguing).

That makes me think of American politics...if the Democrats come up with a good idea, the Republicans automatically assume it's crap because it wasn't from them, and vice-versa.

If theothersteve made good points, they were good points, regardless of who they really came from. Just sayin'.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by shifuimam 

That makes me think of American politics...if the Democrats come up with a good idea, the Republicans automatically assume it's crap because it wasn't from them, and vice-versa.

If theothersteve made good points, they were good points, regardless of who they really came from. Just sayin'.

He used "personal experience" and his private knowledge related to those supposed experiences to back his arguments. Because we now know that he is someone that makes shit up to win online arguments, it would be interesting to go back and see how many of his "stories" trip the BS meter.

[Spheric Harlot]

^ That's the point.

He argues from authority, but in the past, his assertions have rarely stood closer inspection or were just outright fabrication.

[shifuimam]

There's also no confirmation that theothersteve is freudling...so it's kind of unfair to automatically re-evaluate all of theothersteve's posts under the misguided belief that he's someone else.

All I'm saying is, don't go witch hunt crazy on him.

[Shaddim]

I don't think he's posted since someone pointed out the similarities between the two accounts.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Good call. Thought about it at first, but considering how the tables seemed to have turned against me lately, decided not to.

Are you familiar with methods employed by forum software to deal with "trolls"? There are a few solutions:
1. Shadow banning - the banned user is allowed to read and post, but no one sees those posts. Works until the banned checks the forums as a different user and sees those posts missing.
2. Hell-banning - the forum intentionally loses the troll's posts upon submission, errors out 10-90% of the time, basically makes it seem like the forum server is unreliable, but only to the troll
3. Swift deletion. Remove all of the user's posts so that the disturbance is minimized. If the posts have no direct lasting consequences and the number of people that actually see those posts is few, there's little motivation to continue creating new email addresses, connecting to new proxy servers, signing up for new forum accounts, verifying, and getting a couple posts in before deletion.

This is coming from someone that's perma-banned on at least two reasonably active forums.

In addition to these things requiring programming effort resources, which I don't think MacNN has in abundance since there is still no responsive design for the forums, do you really think that any of these things will be effective enough to accomplish some lasting solution?

I don't. I think we are all spinning our tires trying to control things out of our control, and in the process fueling fires.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

In addition to these things requiring programming effort resources, which I don't think MacNN has in abundance since there is still no responsive design for the forums, do you really think that any of these things will be effective enough to accomplish some lasting solution?

I don't. I think we are all spinning our tires trying to control things out of our control, and in the process fueling fires.

You don't think solutions that can and do work for other online communities somehow won't work here?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

You don't think solutions that can and do work for other online communities somehow won't work here?

How can they possibly work once the secret/trick has been exposed?

[Laminar]

Sorry, whether or not they've worked in the past isn't up for argument.

[besson3c]

What is your argument then?

[Laminar]

"Something can be done about annoying forum posters."

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

"Something can be done about annoying forum posters."

and I repeat my question, why would those tactics work? Once the trick/secret has been exposed they would cease to work, the banned individual would just create an alt account, and all this would ultimately prove to be a waste of scarce developmental resources.

Weren't you ever told as a kid to just ignore people that irritate you?

[Laminar]

You're trying to go in circles here. I explained why those tactics work, and I made it clear that they do work. If you refuse to acknowledge that, there's nothing I can do for you.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

You're trying to go in circles here. I explained why those tactics work, and I made it clear that they do work. If you refuse to acknowledge that, there's nothing I can do for you.

I'll take you at your word, but for the life of me I don't see how this would work once the cat has been let out of the bag.

Maybe this would work for non-regulars though, and maybe my MacNN experience has given me a false representation, because there are a ton of long time members here who know the history of this forum like the back of their hand.

[reader50]

We could test one of those tricks, see if anyone notices.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by reader50 

We could test one of those tricks, see if anyone notices.

poop

[Laminar]

Well now I just look crazy. Can't say I hate it.

[Laminar]

Posts don't show up in the thread, but he still appears as the last poster in that thread in the parent listing.

[subego]

Has the joke perhaps gone on long enough?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Has the joke perhaps gone on long enough?

Good lord, I didn't notice.

[andi*pandi]

I don't think he has either.

[besson3c]

Are we talking about Abe?

[reader50]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Are we talking about Abe?

Not this time. Come to think of it, not last time either. Or the time before that ...

The experiment is capped at a week, and we're monitoring every day for any request.