Impersonating users deleted/perm-banned, including most notably "Leuders"

I bet.

Yeah, that worked out so well the last time... We only lost most of the forum. Nothing much, really.

Here's a short one that was on Michael Prescott's blog: http://michaelprescott.typepad.com/micha...nedy-.html

That's the only one that came up in search though I'm sure there were a bunch of others (there are two posts of mine that appear in that search where I refer to being the real me, not my "fan"),Not sure if they were deleted or not.  I've been directed to other sites where they've done it but I can't remember now.  The person themselves has PMd me on a few sites to alert me to some of them.  I haven't kept track though, I just get reports now and then.  

IIRC there's a thread on Skeptiko where someone drew attention to a fake me posting.  

My position has always been that I probably don't have an exclusive right on using this handle. 

I use a pretty consistent writing style so if you see a post ostensibly from me that seems out of character chances are its not me.  Happy to confirm if anyone sends me a link.

Thanks, Arouet. I never saw that one.

Logically this is true, but in practice, it made a huge difference. I don't know what it is - perhaps these people can't bear to write a few sentences expressing interest in ψ! Alternatively, perhaps they dislike actually deceiving a person with whom they are in contact - perhaps others are just 'nerds' - talking to humans isn't fun. When I first suggested it to Alex, I didn't know if it would work, but the effect was amazing. It also eliminated the problem of spammers. I don't think you have had them yet, but they can strike in an amazing way - presumably automated - but the automation is totally defeated. Once the people responsible know we are automaton-proof they will just go elsewhere.

You could start it up, and just more or less waive people through unless you find someone who wants to call themselves "The real Laird" or whatever. The mere prospect of engaging in a discussion seems to help.

David

Personally, if I had to justify my inclusion in writing before being allowed in, I wouldn't be here now. 

Interesting to learn that it was your idea though. I had believed that Alex was the control freak and you were just implementing his policy.

Whose idea was it to bake all those humble pies? MMMMmm.

I have a hard time believing that there is much property rights attached to internet handles. And of course you have to prove some sort of economic loss which would be near impossible for the vast majority of people.  

On the other hand as one of the people who had been impersonated by this guy quite a bit I say: pay up bub!

Yes, that's why I said the thing about Internet pseudonyms.

One of my family members is currently going through this. He thought he could post some bullshit (can I say that?  ) on the Internet and not experience any fall-out. The guy he targeted hired an attorney, who was able to subpoena his ISP, and now he is part of a huge lawsuit involving damages in the millions. (It's a little more complicated than that, though, but of course I'm not going to go into the details.)

He was very, VERY stupid. He thought he could get away with posting BS on the Internet anonymously, posting from his wifi at home on his phone and computer, and there would be no consequences. Now he's been tied up in a lawsuit for over a year, got fired from his job, and might even have his license in his career suspended. Over two Internet posts.

Be careful out there, people!

Logically this is true, but in practice, it made a huge difference. I don't know what it is - perhaps these people can't bear to write a few sentences expressing interest in ψ! Alternatively, perhaps they dislike actually deceiving a person with whom they are in contact - perhaps others are just 'nerds' - talking to humans isn't fun. When I first suggested it to Alex, I didn't know if it would work, but the effect was amazing. It also eliminated the problem of spammers. I don't think you have had them yet, but they can strike in an amazing way - presumably automated - but the automation is totally defeated. Once the people responsible know we are automaton-proof they will just go elsewhere.

You could start it up, and just more or less waive people through unless you find someone who wants to call themselves "The real Laird" or whatever. The mere prospect of engaging in a discussion seems to help.

David

It seems like that suggestion was only good for keeping out spammers. It wouldn't keep out trolls who can write down whatever, and it could possibly (and very likely) put off legitimate posters. I also think that there is currently a troll at the SF that both you and Alex are still engaging with.

Is it true, as one member posted here, that Alex didn't accept his "submission" and therefore asked for a link to his Facebook??? If true, that is beyond the pale, and I would never post on a forum where admins were all up in my business like that.

It seems like that suggestion was only good for keeping out spammers. It wouldn't keep out trolls who can write down whatever, and it could possibly (and very likely) put off legitimate posters. I also think that there is currently a troll at the SF that both you and Alex are still engaging with.

Is it true, as one member posted here, that Alex didn't accept his "submission" and therefore asked for a link to his Facebook??? If true, that is beyond the pale, and I would never post on a forum where admins were all up in my business like that.

It's like a home security system. You don't have to build an impenetrable system, you need to do something to deter most people and they will move on to easier "marks". A determined thief who specifically wants to break into you particular house will probably figure out a way to do so. 

Also like any security system, you build it in layers. The outer layers solve the simple problems, and you add deeper layers to solve the complicated problems.

It sucks to have to deal with a security system on your house: you have false alarms, you need to manage security codes, what about the cleaning lady or pool guy who needs access? Are they trustworthy? But the benefit is keeping the riff-raff out.

Same thing on this forum. It is occasionally intrusive. Some people may be turned off, day one. It's a balancing act. But the job is important because a few a-holes can ruin the experience enough that good minded people throw up their hands and leave.

This thankless job is being done well at this point, and I for one appreciate and it.

You know, folks on a forum like this tend to be an independent and maybe irascible bunch. No surprise there is push-back on something like limits on access. But given the hubbub that a couple people can cause, it's worth the trouble I think.

It's like a home security system. You don't have to build an impenetrable system, you need to do something to deter most people and they will move on to easier "marks". A determined thief who specifically wants to break into you particular house will probably figure out a way to do so. 

Also like any security system, you build it in layers. The outer layers solve the simple problems, and you add deeper layers to solve the complicated problems.

It sucks to have to deal with a security system on your house: you have false alarms, you need to manage security codes, what about the cleaning lady or pool guy who needs access? Are they trustworthy? But the benefit is keeping the riff-raff out.

Same thing on this forum. It is occasionally intrusive. Some people may be turned off, day one. It's a balancing act. But the job is important because a few a-holes can ruin the experience enough that good minded people throw up their hands and leave.

This thankless job is being done well at this point, and I for one appreciate and it.

You know, folks on a forum like this tend to be independent and maybe irascible bunch. No surprise there is push-back on something like limits on access. But given the hubbub that a couple people can cause it worth it.

I wasn't talking about this forum. I was talking about Skeptiko. (SF=Skeptiko Forum)

Do you think an admin should ask to see your Facebook in order to join a free Internet forum?

I wasn't talking about this forum. I was talking about Skeptiko. (SF=Skeptiko Forum)

Do you think an admin should ask to see your Facebook in order to join a free Internet forum?

Oh I see now. 

To your question- Absolutely not. That is probably where I would have to decide how much I wanted to participate.

I think many well intended people would still like, and deserve to have some level of anonymity. An email is the limit I think is reasonable for access to an open discussion site such as this. We are not the CSA or MI5. 

Or put another way-             "After all, we are not communists here" 

(from The Godfather for those who don't know).