Poll

[Davy Stephenson]

Should double named forum memberships be banned from the forum, or and should both members under one name be banned.
I hope the moderators will not stop this thread, it is not intended to cause any harm, lets here from the members, after all it is they who keep the forum/s alive.
If you know of any others doing the same, I feel it is our duty to shop these people, I can say that I know of at least three others who have a Jeckel and hide identitiy.
All comments are also welcome, lets us know your thoughts, keep it civil please.

[pipersgrip]

i really dont care, i dont see why it would be so bad.

[Dionys]

Not to say it's okay, but maybe some people need both a Jeckyl and Hyde persona on here to stay sane. Personally I think someone should maintain one username so that people can get to know them, both good and bad sides. Someone pretending to be someone else, however, is never a good thing as people might then attach comments/personality traits of one person upon another that is undeserving.

Perhaps if the moderators see it as a problem (and I suspect they would have already done something if they really did) they could remove all but one account, choice of the multi-personality.

There's something to be said for extremes, too. The extremes of people who need to have multiple accounts as well as the extremes of people who are offended by such.

[djm]

It is already expressly forbidden to have multiple userids on this forum. That is one of the rules you have agreed to when you joined this forum.

I feel the moderators/owner have every right to excise people who refuse to abide by the rules. This is not a democracy. It is a privately owned operation, and the forum operator has every right to declare himself undisputable. The rest of us here are guests.

djm

[John O'Gara]

I agree totally with DJM. We are guests and can choose to sign on and abide by the rules or choose not to participate. Differences make the world go around, but the common thread is we're all (I think) more or less enthused about learning more and playing the pipes. This board affords us the opportunity to glean information not readily available to many players in years past and therefore, a resource such as this should not be subjected to the whims and abuse of a few.

I started at the bottom of the piping gene pool (and I like it here), but that has not lessened my appreciation of the knowledge, ability and positive spirit of wanting to help displayed by the majority of the members of this board.

That being said, one user name should suffice unless you've got something to hide.

[lordofthestrings]

I don't think people should be able to have two personalities. I understand people may want to ask certain "stupid" questions under a different alias in order to protect their "dignity", but really, who cares!?!? If people are too affraid to ask questions from people who might know in fear of being looked down on or being publicly mocked, then there is a serious problem.

[Jumper]

I was once moderator of an online professional forum in which, it turned out, one person had three very different personas. These entities frequently argued vociferously with one another, and created general havoc (and the occasional near-riot) amongst the other members of the forum.

Very satisfying for this individual, I'm quite sure, but disasterous for the forum as a whole. It folded in less than a year.

[giggleswicksam]

I am on here as giggleswicksam and sam l. This reflected the discussion about people posting under unclear names, I moved from one to the other and have never answered my own questions or agreed with myself!

I hope I'm not on your list Davy!

[Sam L]

You are so right giggleswicksam! And really talented.

I do have an issue with my PC remembering my old username it seems . . .

but should now be ok . . . by the way, that giggleswicksam is a bit of an ignorant twat don't you think guys and gals?

[Davy Stephenson]

I think we all know what and who this thread was originally aimed at, we all know who you were from the off, at least I did, its when members who have double names and a double personality, is when things are going to go wrong and upset the others, this should not and cannot be tollerated period, except maybe for the other 12%, maybe they have double memberships too, and for the record, I have no lists and maybe a word in the above should be changed to CLEVER.

A little bit of knowledge can be very dangerous.

[Nanohedron]

Here's the moderatorial position on the matter:

It is, as djm pointed out, forbidden to have mutiple accounts here, and it's unnegotiable. When found, we correct that, usually going by the account with the most use for deciding which one shall remain. Sometimes we notify the account-holder, and sometimes we don't. The infraction itself isn't cause for outright banning. Sometimes people don't read policy thoroughly and are unaware that they're committing a no-no, and we have to allow for this. So, with one user account operating and the rest deactivated, things are presumed to be back to normal. Repeated violation of the multiple accounts policy is another matter, though.

Not to say that this position couldn't be changed, but it seems like a good one.

[Davy Stephenson]

Correct me if I'm babbling here but, when a member knowingly joins a forum, then spends many a happy hour advising the other members to their preferences etc etc, and then decides after the fact that it would be a great laugh to join as another, go to town on the other law abiding people, just to get their kicks.

Surely this second person being the real person is also in violation to the rule, if so, then can you explain why you let the real instigator off scott free and delete the second imaginary name, they even lied about it when confronted about it, this is no punishment whatsoever, bad form.

Put it this way if you had two driving licences and you were caught on two seperate occasions by the police, do you think they are going to ban only one of the drivers names, now come on.

Please do not try and worm your way out of this one now, you were told about the fact over twelve months ago and did absolutely nothing about it until it was too late, you cannot blame me for acting upon this, I'm only the messenger.

Please do not lock this thread, there is still plenty which the other forum members need to know.

A little bit of knowledge can be very dangerous.

[rorybbellows]

I think the trouble is that some people take this internet chatroom far too seriously ,it is afterall just a chatroom.
I have been personally attacked on a few occasions and find it all just a bit of fun.If I am in the humour I will reply to see what happens ,if I am not I will ignore them and they just go away.
I think by getting upset by the attacks is just giving fuel and credit to your attacker, which is playing right into their hands .

RORY

[Davy Stephenson]

Everone must do what they have to, My grandfather once told me, don't get angry son, get even, and it would be great if the annoyance would as you say go away, but it seems to keep coming back, if you answered to this thread because you have a point to make, then learn exactly what has gone down, go back and check out the postings related to this thread since 2002 onwards, then you will understand.

A little bit of knowledge can be very dangerous.

[pudinka]

..."get even..." It's a wonder we are all not eyeless and toothless by now. And I don't have the time or caffine to go through these threads as far back as 2002.

Personally, I think that too many people take this forum much too seriously. Maybe Michael Egan would have disagreed but he's not around to stab his critics (if all of that is true) with a reamer...he should have relaxed too. He should have turned the other cheek, made more pipes and not spent his time needlessly worrying about two-faced snipers on this forum.