Changing my username and not hiding it

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#1 · Jul 27, 2013

Hey, quick question for the admin team.

So, I was checking out this post and one specific part really caught my eye:

Meadow said:The guy just changed his handle—totally fine by me—and actually reached out to let us know.
He wasn't trying to hide anything or play games.

Honestly, I couldn't care less who this Civilization person is or what their old or new handles might be. What I'm actually wondering about is: a) what happens to the old account once the new one goes live? b) how much "brand recognition" does a new handle need before you decide it isn't just a clone—and thus avoid a Permaban? and c) how much weight does that "not hiding" aspect actually carry when deciding whether to ban a new account?

I’d love some straight, clear answers here—since, let's face it, we aren't exactly briefed on the specifics of the moderation policy.

Thanks!

northerncyclist2 Active Member

89 messages
joined Jan 2016

#2 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:I think this is more of a question for the admins.

So, I was reading this post and this specific part really caught my eye:

I don't really care who this Meadow person is, or what their old or new handle might be. What I'm actually wondering about is a) what happens to the old username once a new one is activated, b) how much "recognition" or notoriety does a new handle need to have before they aren't flagged as a clone and hit with a Permaban, and c) just how much weight does that "not hiding" part carry when deciding if a new handle should be banned?

I’d love some clear, direct answers here, since it seems like we aren't fully briefed on the moderation policies through official notices.

Thanks.

Well, it's pretty straightforward, I guess. Your actual account ID is just a user number that the database automatically generates when you sign up, and that number stays the same forever. The rule against duplicate nicknames is mostly there just to prevent confusion among users and make things easier to manage, but technically, there isn't a hard barrier stopping it. Mods and admins can always identify someone by their ID number. As for whether there's a log of name changes (besides the actual request thread), I guess I don't know for sure.🤷

And I assume the old username just gets released back into the pool of available names.

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#3 · Jul 27, 2013

sorry if I sound a bit blunt here—but you aren't saying anything I haven't heard before, and since you aren't part of the admin team, there’s not much to go on. I appreciate the effort, really, but please don't spam an important thread like this. Let's just take this over to CNN instead. 🙂

northerncyclist2 Active Member

89 messages
joined Jan 2016

#4 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:sorry if I sound a bit harsh here, but you haven't really told me anything I don't already know, and it's not like you're on the admin team or anything. I appreciate the effort, I really do, but maybe don't spam a serious thread like this. Let's just take it over to CNN. 🙂

I mean, do you actually think the admins know more about the technical side of things than I do? 😁

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#5 · Jul 27, 2013

If I were looking for the technical breakdown, I’d probably just ask Aksmija—keep it strictly about the specs, you know? But honestly, I'm here because I want to hear what the Policy Makers have to say about this.

northerncyclist2 Active Member

89 messages
joined Jan 2016

#6 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:If I were looking to dive into the technical side of things, I’d probably reach out to Aksmija directly and frame my question with all the technical specifics. But honestly, I'm mostly hanging out here because I'm curious to see what the Policy Makers have to say about it.

Hey, there's no need to get all worked up right away, I guess. 🤷 I just wanted to help out, I guess.

Sam Alvarez4 Regular

303 messages
joined Sep 2014

#7 · Jul 27, 2013

I’m not usually a fan of cloning, but what happened here is perfectly fine. As far as I can tell, the guy wasn't under a Permaban at the time.

The real issue is when you deal with a clone of a clone of a cloned, Permabaned user who was already Permabaned. Specifically, looking at the PDF World (Lebanon, Iraq, Syria) situation.
The moderators know exactly what's going on, they just choose to look the other way...

rustydrifter10 Regular

693 messages
joined Apr 2011

#8 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:Honestly, I couldn't care less about who this mentioned Civilization person is, or whether they’re using an old or a new handle. What I actually want to know is: a) what happens to the old account once the new one is activated, b) just how much "fame" or recognition does a new nickname need to have before someone decides to flag them as a clone and hit them with a Permaban, and c) how much weight does this whole "not hiding" aspect carry when deciding if a new nickname should be banned?

I honestly don't get why anyone would even think about banning a user just because they stopped posting under one name and started using a new one. It's like if you decided you were done being Brian Edwards78, opened up an account as Mark, and just kept on writing without breaking a single rule—especially since you aren't trying to hide from the mods that you used to be Brian Edwards78 in the first place.

To answer a), Brian Edwards78 would still exist, he'd just be sitting there inactive because that was your choice.
As for b), since Brian Edwards78 is just a standard forum user, there's really no reason to ban Mark; having multiple accounts isn't against the rules here.
Regarding c), the part about being upfront with the moderators matters most if you plan on jumping back into the same discussion threads you used with your first account, simply because of the rules against using multiple handles within a single thread.

Hopefully, that clears things up!

Jeffrey Bennett77 Newcomer

4 messages
joined Jun 2013

#9 · Jul 27, 2013

My handle Dodo89 is still banned—even after I promised I wouldn't touch it and would just start a fresh account 😁 This response is basically a bunch of nothing 🙂

rustydrifter10 Regular

693 messages
joined Apr 2011

#10 · Jul 27, 2013

Jeffrey Bennett77 said:Look, my handle Dodo89 is currently stuck under a permanent ban, even though I specifically told everyone I wouldn't use it anymore and that I was just going to start fresh with a brand-new account! 😁 Look, I have to say, I’m going to have to give a direct response to what rustydrifter10 was getting at there, because we really need to get into the weeds on this one if we want any clarity. 🙂

To be clear, Dodo89 isn't banned—just answering your specific point there! 😁

Jeffrey Bennett77 Newcomer

4 messages
joined Jun 2013

#11 · Jul 27, 2013

Dammit 😁 My posts are getting blocked now? Usually, you guys just hit me with a ban instead 🤣
sorry (see how well I can type that)

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#12 · Jul 27, 2013

rustydrifter10 said:I honestly don't get why anyone would bother banning a user just because they stopped posting under one handle and started using a new one—it seems like such an exercise in futility, doesn't it?

I honestly don't have a clue—that's why I'm asking! 😁

rustydrifter10 said:So, what if you just decided to move on from Brian Edwards78—like, just drop him entirely—and started chatting with Mark instead? You could follow every single rule to a T, all while being totally upfront with the mods about the fact that you used to be Brian Edwards78. Seems doable, right?

So, what if I were to open an account? Brian Edwards78 Or something like that—all without me even tipping off a single moderator. Even so, plenty of people (including the mods themselves!) clearly realize I’m using a second account. If that's the case, would they actually count that other account as a clone?

rustydrifter10 said:As for part A—Brian Edwards78 would still be around, he’d just be sitting on the sidelines because that's the call you made, right?
Regarding part B—since Brian Edwards78 is just his standard handle on the forum, there’s really no reason to ban Mark—I mean, having clones isn't against the rules, right?
The answer to part C—about not hiding those mods—is actually pretty huge if you're planning on sticking around these threads with your first username, especially since we have that rule against using multiple accounts on the same topic.

Hopefully this is specific enough!

What would happen if that other account racked up three strikes for trolling—which, honestly, isn't even a huge deal since most of the mods around here don't even know what trolling actually looks like—and then the user just logged back in under their main account?

To wrap up this round of questions—are there actually any rules against running two accounts at once? Like, say you’re posting on CNN with one account while jumping over to MK with another? Or even just switching it up—maybe Brian Edwards78 posts on even days, and then uses a second account on the odd ones?

rustydrifter10 Regular

693 messages
joined Apr 2011

#13 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:
Let's say I decide to open an account under sl4fko or something similar, without even giving a single moderator a heads-up. Even so, plenty of people (including the mods, honestly) would clearly realize it's just my other account. In that case, would that second account be officially considered a clone?

Look, that account *is* a clone, whether the mods catch on or not. But having clones isn't actually against the rules—it's what you *do* with them that gets you in trouble. If you aren't banned from the forum, you aren't obligated to tell anyone that you've retired your old handle in favor of a new one. You really only need to reach out if you plan on being active in the exact same threads or sub-forums as before, because the mods need to give you the green light for that; since posting from multiple profiles simultaneously is forbidden (across the whole site in certain threads, though some specific sub-forums allow one nick for everything), they have to clear it first.

Brian Edwards78 said:What would happen in a scenario where that second account racks up three warnings for trolling (which, by the way, isn't even a huge deal since most of the mods don't even know what actual trolling looks like), and then the user logs in using their original account?

If you were to use your original handle while the other one was sitting under a suspension, you’d end up with one account getting a Permaban and the other getting an extension on its ban for another seven or ten days.

Brian Edwards78 said:To wrap up this round of questions, are there any rules against running two accounts in parallel? For instance, using one account for CNN and the other for MK. Or maybe Brian Edwards78 posts on even days, and sl4fko posts on odd days.

There isn't a rule against that as long as you aren't breaking other regulations, like trying to post while you're under a ban or if one of the handles is currently restricted. For example, if Brian Edwards78 has a restriction on MK, that means you can't go in there using any other nickname either.

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#14 · Jul 27, 2013

You can't break the rules with your main account either, right? 😁

rustydrifter10 said:If you tried using your main handle while this one is banned, you'd get a Permaban on one and a week-long extension on the other.

Even if the original ban was totally unfair?

rustydrifter10 said:There isn't actually a rule against it unless you're breaking stuff—like trying to post while you're under suspension or if one of the accounts has a partial restriction. For instance, Brian Edwards78 has a restriction on MK; that means he can't post there with any other handle.

Wait, just a second ago you said one would get a Permaban and the other an extension, but now you're saying there's no rule against posting while an account is suspended? That seems a little inconsistent to me—don't you think? 😕

rustydrifter10 Regular

693 messages
joined Apr 2011

#15 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:So, just to be crystal clear here—it’s against the rules to break them using your original account too, right? Just making sure I've got that straight. 😁

Of course, but we also have specific rules for when you're mentioning multiple nicknames in a single post.

Brian Edwards78 said:Even if the original ban was totally unjustified, does it really matter?

Look, if the admin team takes a second look and decides that the ban was actually a mistake, they’ll clear it right up and get you back in. But otherwise, they're going to treat it as a justified call.

Brian Edwards78 said:Wait, hang on a second—you just told me a moment ago that one person would get a permanent ban while the other would just face an extended suspension, but now you're claiming there aren't any posting restrictions at all while an account is currently under a ban. To me, those two things seem to be clashing pretty hard; don't you think? 😕

I honestly don't get what part of this isn't clicking for you. Look, if you have one account sitting under a ban and you try to hop on with a different nickname, you’re playing a dangerous game—one account is going to catch a temporary suspension for maybe a week or ten days, while the other could end up getting a Permaban. Once that short suspension period is actually over, you can go back to posting normally with that secondary account (or any of your other unbanned ones), provided you actually follow the community guidelines. But—and this is the big "but"—if any of your accounts gets hit with a Permaban because they broke the rules so badly they were kicked out for good, then you aren't allowed to post from *any* account at all. In that specific sentence you highlighted, I was using posting while under a ban as a prime example of what counts as breaking the rules.

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#16 · Jul 27, 2013

rustydrifter10 said:If the admins decide the ban was a mistake, they'll lift it. Otherwise, it sticks.

So, let's say the admin team realizes the ban was totally unjustified and lifts it—but what about the first account that got banned? If the second account also caught a permaban just because they were posting while the first one was suspended, wouldn't that second ban be removed too? I mean, since that second ban is clearly tied to the first "wrongful" one, it’s only logical that both should be cleared, right?

rustydrifter10 said:I don't get why this isn't clicking for you. If one handle is banned and you start posting from another, one gets a permaban and the other gets maybe seven or ten days. Once those few days are up, you can go back to using that account—along with any others that aren't banned—as long as you follow the rules. But, if any of your accounts gets a permanent ban because they broke the rules so badly they had to kick them out for good, then you aren't allowed to post from *any* account at all. In that specific sentence you underlined, posting while under a ban is listed as an example of breaking the rules.

The way that underlined sentence was phrased was a bit fuzzy—it could definitely be read a couple of different ways. But hey, we've got it sorted now.

rustydrifter10 Regular

693 messages
joined Apr 2011

#17 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:Let's play out a scenario where the admins decide a ban was totally unjustified and wipe it clean, but then they look at a second account that got hit with a permanent ban because someone was posting while the first account was already sidelined. If the whole thing started with an unfair ban on the primary account, wouldn't it be logical to scrap the secondary ban too, since it's essentially just a domino effect from that first mistake?

Well, honestly, probably not. The reality is that the user was still actively posting while the account was suspended. They could have just sat tight and waited until they proved the initial ban was a mistake. Plus, you have to remember that sometimes there are amnesties issued that aren't necessarily admissions of error, but more like acts of grace—there are a lot of gray areas in these situations that the staff takes into account.

Brian Edwards78 said:I wasn't quite following the logic behind that underlined sentence because it felt like it could go a few different ways. But hey, glad we've cleared that up now.

Sorry about the clunky wording there! I'm really glad we're finally on the same page.

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#18 · Jul 27, 2013

rustydrifter10 said:It depends—probably not. The user was still posting even while they were under a ban. They could have just waited it out until they proved the ban was a mistake. Sometimes an amnesty isn't necessarily saying the ban was wrong, just that it's being forgiven—plus, there are plenty of gray areas to consider too.

But how is someone supposed to prove a ban was unfair if they can't even post because they're banned?

rustydrifter10 Regular

693 messages
joined Apr 2011

#19 · Jul 27, 2013

Brian Edwards78 said:How on earth is someone supposed to prove they shouldn't have been banned when they can't even post anymore?

We've got the Catch-22 here.

Are we still just talking about hypothetical scenarios and generalities?

Michelle Alvarez8 RegularOP

299 messages
joined Nov 2015

#20 · Jul 27, 2013

How does the admin team actually decide if a ban was justified or not? Especially in those cases where an admin was the one who handed out the initial ban in the first place.
Do they even bother looking at the arguments or evidence provided during the appeal, or is it just a total wash?

Changing my username and not hiding it

🔗 Similar threads