Does anyone else agree it's time to stop existing members re-signing up with new ID's? It's just a form of deception. Well attempted deception anyway - we always recognise them in reality. Shouldn't people be honest about their identity though?

It's fairly standard for tech/admin to have a couple of 'crashtest dummy' accounts to view site changes at various permission levels, test bannings, etc but other than that I can see no reasons for members to hold multiple accounts.

What if one account is inactive? What are the rules, if there are any in place, concerning multiple active accounts? It wouldn't be allowed on the DIF. Col. Trautman is the only account I have active on SZ at the moment.

You request the reactivation of your account. It's not rocket science.

That also helps avoid the situation where old users, with more issues that Marvel comics, sign up pretending to be 'new' users.

feather wrote:
I meant after someone returns with a sock to deceive. I will admit that I did deceive with Col. Trautman, although it wasn't too hard to realise it was me. If someone has knowingly returned with a new account to deceive, should they be allowed to have their old account reactivated?

No, they should be banned on discovery, including any 'inactive' accounts.
Again, not rocket science.

feather wrote:
I would tend to agree with you actually. After all I have always talked about more "top down" moderation.

The other thing that happens with someone coming the cunt like you did is that people may think you are someone else and they get lumbered with the shit for your actions.

Wtg hero.

Col. Trautman wrote: Get fucked with that lame shit stirring attempt as well.

feather wrote:
Yeah that is a bit out of order. Col. Trautman is my first sock actually. Mr. Wolf doesn't count, because I told everyone about that in the welcome thread.

feather wrote:
I was being honest, I wasn't attempting to shit stir at all.

Uhuh.

Truth be told, when I saw your first post under this nick I thought it was maybe DG had a few and was taking a jab.

For a bit there I was sincerely disappointed in him and he dropped in my estimation.
Then you added the 'scouse twat' link and I tippled it was you on a shit-stirring/victim script trip.

Well done, you fuck off people here and potentially trash your mate, all in one cowardly stunt.
Well ain't you special?

You thought I was DG and he dropped in your estimation? Guilty until proven innocent eh? Nice one feather. DG wouldn't do that for one thing, you should know that. I'm disgusted that you'd even consider it for one second.

Yup, I'm responsible for the results of your deception.

Get fucked. 'victim'.

I assume you are also 'disgusted' at pheony believing you were resistance'?

Col. Trautman wrote:
You're disgusted!?! Un-flaming-believable!!!

What I'm suggesting, and has already been detailed by Feather, is that if you're spotted trying to slope in under some new guise when you've already got a 'voluntarily inactive' account, you should be banned on the spot, since it's obvious you're being duplicitous. There might be a case for someone to make a fresh start under a new name, which they could discuss with admin, and exceptions could be made for that, but generally speaking, when folk sneak in, it's not for any good reason.

Gilly wrote:
I agree with that, it's how I would do things too.

feather wrote:
You're responsible for your own thoughts and feelings.

Col. Trautman wrote:

Col. Trautman wrote:
You're responsible for trying to manipulate them with lies.