We actually already chewed through this whole topic over in that other GDPR thread. At the end of the day, a private forum can set whatever rules it wants, provided they stay within the bounds of the law. One of those rules could easily be that you have to share your IP address or some other specific data point just to get in. If you aren't willing to do that, then you simply can't be a member of the community.
I'm not sure what there is to be confused about here. Some Forum Users are using allowed clones to bypass their deserved penalties, just like the opening post illustrates: they spread their penalty points across multiple accounts. It’s really not my job to sit around tracking the point balances of specific Forum Users or their clones just to report them. On the other hand, those users who stick to just one account end up serving their bans fairly. Please look at this thread as part of the PŽK's effort to address a major loophole in our rules.
The title pretty much says it all, but I figured I’d lay out the details for clarity: a Forum User with an original handle can essentially operate through a Clone account. If the original user picks up 50 points for trolling one day, and then their Clone picks up another 50 points for the same thing the next, that’s 100 penalty points sitting on one person—yet neither account gets banned. It gets even more frustrating when you consider someone running a whole fleet of accounts like Clone1, Clone2, all the way up to Clone20. If each one grabs 50 points for trolling, that’s a massive 1,000 points accumulated by a single individual, yet not a single one of those nicknames faces a ban. Meanwhile, those of us playing by the rules and sticking to just one single account end up serving our bans regularly.
How do you all think we should fix this unfairness? Don't you think it's high time we implemented a rule to ban all associated Clone accounts at once? 🙂
slypuma12 said:I'm standing my ground here. You'll have to wait for Nice to weigh in if you want more input.
A female user wrote
As a layperson, I’d say you need someone to give you a real hands-on evaluation—you know, the medical kind, from a man's perspective.
And you're giving her 250 points for hate speech and a direct call for violence?🤦 If I had posted something like that, I would've been hit with a permanent ban and ended up in a holding cell. You're making a joke out of being a moderator.
Edward Perez64 said:Even if Hiccup were to repent, he’d probably end up forgiven for everything bad he did and land straight in paradise, wouldn't he?🤦
I guess that kind of logic only works within a religious worldview?🤔 You commit a massive wrong, say you're sorry, and suddenly everything is wiped clean—but what about the victims? What about their perspective?
As for people who actually idolize criminals, there isn't much we can do about that. At the end of the day, that comes down to an individual's choice and their own personal philosophy toward life.
We also shouldn't forget that Hiccup wasn't the only criminal out there; there were plenty on the winning side too, just as there are people today still glorifying certain villains from the other side.
My take is pretty simple: a crime is a crime, and a victim is a victim. There shouldn't be different sets of criteria based on which side of history someone was standing on.😲
Everyone has the right to love and be loved. But glorifying someone isn't the same thing as loving them. End of Day Quote
Jamie Bishop29 said:Unfortunately, slypuma12, you're just proving my point about how shallow and superficial your approach to being a moderator really is.
You didn't do anything for me personally; your job is to serve the Reddit community, the users, and common sense.
But you clearly don't get that.
And you're demonstrating exactly that with this ban:
Absolutely. That's a ban worth at least 500 points. I bet Ball and slypuma12 will be turning in their resignations now. slypuma12's resignation is final.☕
It’s easy enough to fall for someone because of their best qualities, but the real challenge—and I think the true mark of character—is finding room in your heart for people who have significant flaws. It's a bit like how some people find themselves drawn to figures like Hitler and his followers despite all their massive shortcomings; instead of being met with understanding, they often just end up getting reported. 🤦 If we look at it from a spiritual perspective, Jesus taught us to love everyone unconditionally, which would theoretically include even someone like Hitler. So, if that's the standard, why shouldn't an individual be allowed to feel that kind of affection?
Look, he isn’t exactly putting Hitler on a pedestal; he just feels an affinity for him. To me, loving someone and glorifying them are two very different things. At the end of the day, I believe people should have the freedom to feel how they feel about whoever they choose.
E: Honestly, this is enough to warrant a permanent ban. 🙂
The issue isn't really about the specific posts that were removed; it’s more about the ones that should have been taken down but weren't. It comes down to how he or Tyler Vaughn7 handles things. That’s the core of what we're discussing here—this feeling that the moderation standards are totally inconsistent. Honestly, it feels like a repeat of last year: the exact same moderators, just a different group of users on the forum.
The way I see it, we're looking at a technical glitch in the forum software. It seems like there's some kind of bug preventing Tyler Vaughn7 or slypuma12 from being cleared out of the moderator database. Honestly, that feels like the only logical explanation for why one of them is still showing up as a mod.
Larry Perez69👋 We might be a small group, but we definitely make our presence felt ☕ On the flip side, there are plenty of clones out there, but they don't really matter ☕
Chloe Cooper10 said:Ross, we really need to stop being so affectionate. 😢 The clones get jealous, and then you just never know what might happen next. 🕺
Larry Perez69👋 Interesting theory here...☕ I actually heard that AOT moved out to Jackson because she wanted some peace and quiet to focus on her jigsaw puzzles.☕
Larry Perez69👋 It feels like our friend from AlwaysOnTop hasn't really made her presence felt in this specific section of the forum for quite a while now. I was just sitting here wondering—what do you think is the reason for that?☕