I'm so sick of these motherfucking sock trolls on this motherfucking board!!!

 

Nice idea. Have fun trying to get it implemented.

I doubt this place is that much different from many others. Some socks are fun, some are just plain stupid, and some are vicious. It's the way of the interwebz.

At least we can put douchebags on "ignore."

 

Where do I sign up for this? I'm all for it. I honestly believe this could be one of the biggest improvements on this forum since I've been here.

Hey Admins you listening. The socks have taken over the place and we can't hardly even talk anymore.

How about it? One IP; one account. No exceptions not even for mods.

PS I just used the report feature on your OP to report it as an excellent Idea. That way we know someone got it.

 

Hey, it works for me too. I'm just too cynical to think it will ever happen. And your contention that reporting it means that an admin will actually look at it is, I fear, naive.

Trust me, I'm not belittling the idea at all. I applaud it. I just don't think it will happen. And even if it did, there is such a thing as "dynamic" IP addresses, isn't there?

After all, some of these people seem pretty determined to make our lives miserable. Implementing such a rule would probably be taken as a personal challenge!

Some people apparently can only get their jollies by being mean. Some are attention whores -- witness the threads that get completely derailed by socks arguing with each other.

Good luck on your quest. Just don't be too disappointed when nothing happens.

 

hmmm but me and my twin use the same computer, and we dont want the same account

 

Something else I just thought of.

The socks don't just screw up the forums. They play on the stories site, too. I don't think either the OP or Stumbler submits work there, and I don't know how much time either of you spend there, but there are people, apparently socks (no forum posts, no forum threads, no stories site comments), who routinely vote some writers' stories into oblivion while giving positive votes to others. These socks, I believe, belong to other writers.

Sad, isn't it. These are probably the same people who amused themselves as kids by pulling the wings off butterflies or tying cans to the tails of stray cats. :wall:

 

What gets me are the ones who are banned then return under another name and continue to post the same obnoxious shit they did before.

 

I couldn't agree more - unfortunately that screams censorship. We all know how people feel about freedom of speech and censorship here.

 

You're right the odds are that nothing will happen and the socks will continue to be able to screw up any serious conversation as you say by just arguing with each other.

Or creating an account and then creating multiple racist threads which they keep going with the help of their other socks.

But the outcome of doing nothing is always guaranteed and at least this way there is a chance no matter how slim.

I don't submit much of anything anymore simply because of all the phony bullshit that goes on, the slipping mod standards, and the escalating censorship.

All of which I think can actually be traced to the number of socks and the limited methods of dealing with them.

 

No that's bullshit ejls. Freedom of speech guarantees the individual a right to speak and write their mind. Free speech does not include making false of misleading speech which is all a sock is designed to do; i.e. mislead.

Lies and deception are not premited under free speech definitions and laws.

 

That also bothers me a great deal because it seems to me the ones who get banned and stayed banned and the ones that don't and are given more chances depends on just how well they can kiss moderator ass and what I suspect are PM campaigns behind the scenes.

But there sure does not seem to be any consistency there.

 

Or the ones who come back with a new IP, new email address, and no proof that they are a former member.

Stumbler, I love the way you comment on my statement with "bullshit", and can be so nice to others. You absolutely over looked the part where I said it screamed censorship and only addressed the difference between freedom of speech and free speech.

Thanks for the lesson.

 

All I did was point that "socks" are not covered under our definition and laws concerning free speech so eliminating them does not amount to censorship.

Censoring false and misleading speech happens to be a very serious responsibility of all publications because its part of their public responsibility.

If a newspaper or TV station runs an obviously false and misleading ad or story they can be charged and sued as well as the creators.

And no I'm not saying that can happen in this environment because we're all public persons here. But that's the laws and definitions out there in the real world.

 

"clarise" is technically a sock for an account that no longer exists.

But if the other account did exist, and I wanted to use the other account to play one against the other and wreak havoc in the manner that Stumbler and others suggest, I do not think an IP restriction would stop me.

I have access to as many as four different IP addresses on some days, and at least two addresses, six days out of the week.

Many people use service providers that implement pooled dynamic IP's, in which case IP enforcement would be impossible (since the user would have no control over the IP address assigned). XNXX accounts created from such networks would randomly lock users out.

Other people access the Internet through corporate firewall gateways, which are most likely static-addressed. For instance, it is not uncommon for hundreds of employees to be accessing the Internet through a single static gate, in which case they would all appear to have the same IP address, from the perspective of servers out in the world.

Origen, Stumbler, WSF and the other proponents of this idea have made many good points. I just wonder whether it is worth debating the pros and cons, when it might not even be technically feasible.

 

I realized this....

...which is why the mods need extraordinary banning powers. You spam, you get one warning and then you're done.

 

Most sock accounts on here are obnoxious and seem to only want to join to preach about racism. They get banned and then rejoin with a different account, or maybe there really are hundreds of people who are all illiterate and hold the exact same views.

But if you're saying that people shouldn't post anything that is untrue, then the believers of god should be banned if they post that god is real. And there should be no political threads, either, because half of them are lies or border on lies, depending on where the information comes from in the first place.

So all you'd have left after banning those members and removing their preferred topics is banal shit about people's lives, like in the good morning thread, or the random thoughts thread.

 

The programming to do this would be horrendous. VBulletin can't do it out of the box. It would be custom PHP programming. And the ISP would have to support it, too, by granting server-side includes.... This sort of thing is feasible for corporate sites that are self-hosted, because the entity has control over the server configuration and topology. Very difficult to achieve through an ISP.

I very much doubt XNXX is self-hosted by its ownership. Another writer did some digging with IPROUTE and other tools a few months back, and discovered that the IP trace for this site goes through New Jersey. That is amazing, if you think about it, given it is hosted in Europe (Belgium, isn't it?). Given all the work that has gone into hiding the physical location of this place, I very much doubt you could find the servers by knocking on the owner's front door. In which case, this "fix" would be very difficult and costly to achieve.

 

Nope and the reason I try to choose words very carefully is so people like you can read them the same way and not go off on some tangent that was never part of my statement. We're talking about obviously false and provably so statements and attempts to deceive or purposely misinform.

No matter what some egotists like to claim around here we cannot prove or disprove God nor beliefs and non beliefs. We can't even agree on the fucking terms and there is no way to quantify and empirically prove. Same with most politics with the exception that people can sue and people do get sued all the time in the political realm even though with our concepts of free speech, robust debates, and politicians being public figures there is incredible leeway for political debates and disputes.

The same is true for writers who write under multiple names. I actually forget how many different names Stephen King writes under for example. They claim if he didn't he would flood the market with his name alone. Is that deliberate deception? Perhaps it is but the market place also determines its success or failure and its no secret that King uses several names, so readers are being willingly deceived.

That's not the case with socks on this forum. The purpose is to deceive and/or disrupt.

 

It would be nice.

 

It won't happen, because socks cause = drama and drama = fun.