Revealing my Identity.

Author: Crocodile ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 32
  • Crocodile
    Crocodile avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 43
    0
    0
    7
    Crocodile avatar
    Crocodile
    --> @Ragnar
    You ought to give them your evidence against them. If they refuse, you could give them a light temp-ban. I doubt they'll do it again. Some rare cases, of course, could be an exception. 

    2 people already found out who I was before this.
  • nmvarco
    nmvarco avatar
    Debates: 11
    Forum posts: 32
    0
    0
    9
    nmvarco avatar
    nmvarco
    --> @Crocodile
    I’m themasterdebater101 on ddo
    troller
  • Ragnar
    Ragnar avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 1,086
    5
    6
    10
    Ragnar avatar
    Ragnar
    --> @Crocodile
    Thanks for your input. Settled on not specifically referencing such outlier cases in the new CoC. What do you think of this drafted line?
    Users are free to create a new account or switch to an old one, so long as they both inform moderators to ban the prior, and demonstrate no exploitative intent.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 248
    Forum posts: 6,769
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @Ragnar
    You need to expand on specifics of the last phrase. Otherwise, it can ironically be the mods who ban based on that.
  • Ragnar
    Ragnar avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 1,086
    5
    6
    10
    Ragnar avatar
    Ragnar
    --> @RationalMadman
    How about basically inverting them? If not, then any suggestions for better wording?
    Users are free to transition a new account or back to a former, so long as they demonstrate no exploitative intent, and inform moderators to ensure only one is active.

  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 248
    Forum posts: 6,769
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @Ragnar
    If that is all you meant then yes it's fine. I assumed it also meant exploiting three things:

    1. Creating alts as a very experienced and successful debater (so not an unsuccessful debater with such a severely low Elo you just want a second try to get high/decent) and baiting people in on your account/identity to garner wins to later go 'haha it was me all along and now I have 2 account in the Top 7!' Especially if this is done a third time over, it becomes a nuisance.
    2. Harassing a user (or users) tactically over many alts but doing it such that the user(s) feel obligated to 'tough it out' and not report as no one account did it too much, too often. This would probably only be done by someone who was already a significant nuisance in other ways, but it arguably could be done by someone who was patient enough, used VPNs well and when caught out by you simply pleaded ignorance and that they forgot to inform you (but the point is that it's unlikely they'd get caught, given the stealth that goes along with this and if you think this is imaginary, I am telling you this has been done on other websites and platforms and is very difficult to police without active 'radar' of people's IPs, system info etc).
    3. Creating alts to disarm former foes to gain dox-worthy or general dirt on them and/or other users by playing extremely friendly for a period of time whereby afterwards this information is used by the user in an exploitative manner. The key aspect of this is that had the user maintained their former username throughout, the victim would never have trusted or disclosed the information as their guard would have been up. You can argue that this is not exploitative, since this is what goes along with a 'fresh start' without former rivalries but this is also why I said you had to be precise and exact on what 'exploitative' meant so that you can easier justify bans later based on it and even just reading this in the Code of Conduct would remind users to keep their guard up to this type of thing.

  • Ragnar
    Ragnar avatar
    Debates: 24
    Forum posts: 1,086
    5
    6
    10
    Ragnar avatar
    Ragnar
    --> @RationalMadman
    "exploitative intent" is meant to be open ended, to avoid needing future referendums to add to different exploits not specifically prohibited.

    I believe you on how far people go, and consider it to be beyond lame. This being a small website, we've been spared the worst of it, but have still seen a bit of ugliness in this direction.