Posting on the forum with a burner account after getting banned

Hey there.
I was wondering what the current policy is on posting from an alt account right after someone gets banned for being a total jerk.
The Rules haven't been touched since 2006, and they still say no alt accounts, but the way things actually work here has shifted a bunch of times since then.
As far as I recall about using an alt after a ban, the last rule was that it’s a big no-no, and the user ends up getting an extended suspension on one profile and a permanent ban on the other.
What's the deal with that nowadays?

Is there someone as "brilliant" as you who wouldn't know that? I suppose we should just ask those weirdos from your offline circles—the ones with ten clones each—what they think about it. What's your take?

Great question, dustypilot11. 😘

I I'm wondering too—what’s actually the standard practice right now? 🍿

Look, our general rule is pretty straightforward: we don't allow anyone to jump on a burner account while their main profile is under suspension. As for whether a moderator is going to drop a warning first or just go ahead and ban the alt account immediately—well, it really depends on the specific circumstances. We look at the "why" behind the ban. There's a massive difference between someone being a bit rowdy in a casual chat room versus someone intentionally stirring up drama and tension in a serious discussion. It’s all about the context. Plus, there are those awkward moments where our newer moderators aren't quite sure how to handle a situation, so they reach out to me for guidance. But by the time I can even weigh in, the user might have already served their suspension, or they've gone off on a spree posting from their clone, or something else entirely unexpected happens.

rustydrifter10 said:Generally speaking, we don't permit users to bypass an active ban by posting from an alternate account. Whether a moderator decides to issue a simple warning or simply pull the trigger on a ban for the clone—and how long that suspension lasts—is entirely dependent on the specific circumstances at hand. It’s a matter of nuance; there is a vast difference between someone being mildly disruptive in a trivial chat room and someone intentionally stoking the fires of a heated, serious debate. Furthermore, we occasionally run into situations where our newer moderators feel a bit out of their depth and reach out to me for guidance, all within a forty-eight-hour window while a user is finishing their ban, flooding the boards with a secondary account, or engaging in some other unpredictable behavior.

And I have to ask: why isn't every single new user automatically screened for existing accounts as part of standard operating procedure? Implementing such a check would undoubtedly clear up much of this ongoing ambiguity.

rustydrifter10 said:Basically, we don't let people post from an alt while their main account is banned. Whether a mod sends a warning or just nukes the alt too—and how long that ban lasts—really depends on the situation. It’s different if they got banned for something minor versus causing drama in serious threads. Plus, sometimes the new mods aren't sure what to do, so they ask me, even though I've barely been on this forum for two days, and by then the user has already finished their ban, spammed through an alt, or something else entirely.

So, basically, a rookie mod can ban someone for being a jerk, but if that same person keeps acting out on an alt and trashing the place, that mod isn't allowed to just decide to ban the alt too? Even when reports are piling up from all over? Man, what a mess. Guess we just gotta be patient... I guess they learn slow.

So, when are we finally getting a ban for all this gossip? 🍿

Sent from my Galaxy S7 using Reddit

Noah Fowler3 said:When are they finally gonna start banning people for spreading rumors? 🍿

Or just for being spineless forum trolls? 🍿

David Richardson67 said:Why doesn't every single new user undergo mandatory cloning tests by default? It would clear up a lot of confusion.

It wouldn't solve a thing.
If a clone posts from the same IP address as the "original," then administration (eventually) catches it anyway.

In most cases, clones end up exposing themselves—through their writing style, subject matter, specific slang, and so on. New accounts don't have those patterns established yet...

(Not a hater of the "normal" clones...)

David Richardson67 said:So why doesn't every single new user get automatically screened for being a clone as part of the official onboarding process? Honestly, I think that would clear up so many of the headaches we deal with here.

The truth is, it’s just way too much busywork for no real reason. We run checks when there's actually something suspicious to look at.

dustypilot11 said:So you're saying it's possible for a new moderator to ban someone for being straight-up abusive, but then if that exact same person keeps acting out through a burner account while following all the rules to a T, the moderator isn't allowed to just connect the dots and ban the clone too? Even if they're getting reports from multiple different threads?

Just because someone flags an account as a clone doesn't mean it actually is one. A moderator can't just hand out bans based solely on user reports without proof.

dustypilot11 said:Man, that sounds like such a headache. So what's the move now? Are we just supposed to sit tight and hope they learn how to behave eventually?

Well, some people just don't have any intention of playing nice. You definitely get all sorts of personalities on these boards.