View Full Version : So who all got banned?
05-21-2002, 02:09 PM
I don't know what the hell happened but there seems to be a few missing. What gives?
05-21-2002, 03:12 PM
What are you talking about Jeff ? I haven't seen any postings that would get anyone banned.
05-21-2002, 03:13 PM
Look on page 2.
05-21-2002, 03:33 PM
Are you talking about the locked thread ? If so, that's nothing new. Same old pattern.
I just feel sorry for George, constantly having to clean up the mess.
05-21-2002, 04:12 PM
They banned the Jim Demmitt impersonator. Or at least the fake Jim D. ID got banned.
05-21-2002, 04:24 PM
I don't know what you are talking about either, Jeff. But Jason has it correct. We did ban the Jim "Demmit" (one "t") impersonator and the IP addresses associated with that login.
Please let me know who else you think is banned. This is done very rarely and is most often used on fake IDs.
Jim Demmitt Jr
05-21-2002, 07:49 PM
Thank's George for banning that person
Things go so smoothly like now no bad posts it takes a real low life person to do that kind of thing
I noticed the persons fighting with me replying with pictures is no longer doing so and look how nice it is with true adult and nice people I have replying to my posts
Did you banned all or anything around my name as letter change?
I do hope this never happens again my name will stay as it is and never change thanks George
05-21-2002, 08:45 PM
knock knock, anyone???...anyone???, no-ones arguing with you anymore because you decided to stick to the topic, and you know that as much as everyone else[no I dont want a response from you about what I just said, PERIOD(!)] :rolleyes: .
05-21-2002, 10:00 PM
It would be nice if we banned someone without having to use a fake ID.
05-22-2002, 08:41 AM
IMO, the imposter who got banned wasn't the REAL problem here. That guy was just feed up with all your BS and wanted to teach you a lesson.
While I don't think impersonating someone is a good idea for many reasons, I don't think you should be blaming all the flames to your post on him either. The majority of the responses were to the posts that YOU made not the imposter.
Dozens of people have told you why you are treated with such disrespect and how to change that. Since you always ignore their advice and blame someone else I won't bother trying to explain it again.
05-22-2002, 01:18 PM
Boy, that makes sense you can make all the problems you can think of, threaten, run your mouth about anything you want and just in general cause trouble, but fake a ID and you are banned?
I don't agree with using someone else’s ID, but come on. If you are going to ban a person for one mistake, then how many does it take to get the other person out? Do we need (or can we), take a vote?
If one person had not started this whole mess then there would have not an imitation post fer sure.
I know some of you will say "If you don't like it don't read it", but when there are 4 topics be the same person it is hard not to. And I for one am sick of it. Who else?
And yes this is the Real Jeff.
05-22-2002, 03:16 PM
..or cry at the amount of time wasted on this subject. But with as many members as we have and so many trying to get across their point of view as the last word, it's hard to end something like this. If all of the time wasted here on this post, on other posts like this and setting up fake IDs and making posts was used to write FAQs or answer other member's legitimate SC questions, this whole board would be a better place.
I have talked with Ron D. and we have only banned the fake ID and the IP addresses associated with that ID. Neither of us has received an e-mail from someone else that got banned asking why. The banning of the IP addresses was to find out who faked an ID and to keep them from making others. We (the SCCoA) have had issues around fake and stolen IDs and are particularly sensitive to this problem. I also fail to see what good the especially inflammatory and derogatory user profile for the fake ID serves.
What was so unusual about this case was that members reported the fake ID and wanted it stopped before it went any further. I had not seen or noticed it until it was reported to me. From what I have read (even in this thread) the general consensus is that it was not appreciated to post in that way. I'm sure it would have started a parade of other imitators of the imitator wanting to get their points across as well. It cannot be allowed. There is a pretty big list of banned fake User IDs.
I will restate that NO USER (except the fake ID and IPs) was intentionally banned over this incident. Translation: No one was singled out over this, but we did want to know who did it.
I try to moderate and be as blind as possible to who is making the post. Telling me that one bad thing deserves another bad thing in response just doesn’t cut it with me! Also, no one SC owner is "better" or "worse" than any other, in my eyes. No favors, no exceptions.
I'm not asking you guys/gals to like each other or even talk to each other off or on this board, but we will require while you are here that everyone be civil and not stir up stuff intentionally. What that equates to around here is just stay out of these kinds of situations. We do not really need "vigilantes" assisting in their own ways. I'm not convinced we will achieve a better structure through anarchy. Use some discretion in which posts you read and to which posts you respond. I'll also say by the same token that other posters should refrain from singing the same ol' tune over and over, since many tire from that behavior as well. You know when your are about to make a post that will get negative attention, just refrain from that post. It gets easier once you do it a few times.
There are whole boatloads of people who come to this site just to get good information on their SC and do not become embroiled in these meaningless squabbles. Imagine that, coming to a car site for car information.
Please, just use some common sense on all sides and don't keep escalating and fueling these kinds of threads. There are a lot more people who DO NOT participate in these fiascos than there people who DO participate. So, if you DO participate (and you know who your are), just stop! It does get easier, if you will do it a couple of times! Those people who DO NOT participate will thank you. If you still feel compelled to participate just e-mail myself or another SC buddy and we will talk you down from it. Now go find a real post, reply and help out another SC owner!!!
Jim Demmitt Jr
05-22-2002, 07:59 PM
(Deleted by moderator, issue passed on to Bill Evanoff)
05-22-2002, 08:06 PM
this is none of my business, but since its not meant to be a private message...
Nathan thank you :-)
Your right my big mouth get's me into more trouble just get my car together and prove what I have ben talking about
Thank you for working so hard to get these meet's together I for one appreciate it very much
I wont be able to make this meet got my arm dislocated Friday recovering from that will defiantly be at the next meet to meet all of you very nice people
Nathan hope you get another SC soon :-)
Im confused, so is Nathan good or very bad?
Jim Demmitt Jr
05-22-2002, 08:12 PM
(This message was left blank)
05-22-2002, 10:53 PM
Well I guess it's put up or shut up time.
I will never, ever post a responce on a topic, other than a legit question (such as a tech question), related to Jim.
05-23-2002, 12:27 AM
I quit a long time ago. I don't even read his posts.
Does this mean if Chuck dares to masquerade as his hero Mister Scott again that he will be banned also?
Here take a look at this frequent ID faker!
This must be stopped! If not then I've got dibs on Mr. Spock!
I always wanted to be addressed as Cheif Science Officer!
05-23-2002, 06:53 AM
You know that is not our intent to make people stop having handles on the board. What we are concerned about are deliberate attempts to for one person appearing to be another real ID on the board. For instance, if a "Vernon Crader" appeared and started giving an erronous advice in an attempt to discredit, emabarass or just make fun of the real Vernon, that ID and IP adresses would be also banned.
05-23-2002, 07:33 AM
I can understand why a "bogus" username would be banned, I understand entirely!
It seems that in this case not only did the "bogus" name get banned, but his IP address as well, not allowing the "real" user to partake of the SCCOA BBS. The "real" user in question wasn't the one that was banned, but because his address is attatched to the "bogus" name he too, was banned.
Let's face it, we can talk about getting along til we are blue in the "fingers" (LOL) but it will never happen.
All parties that have jumped in on these arguments are all guilty. In this case the original intent of the user in question may have just been a bad descision.
I understand why you did what you did George, but if the user in question mailed you, would you consider allowing he, or any others who may have taken there sense of humor a bit overboard to use the SCCOA BBS again knowing that people understand that it is a SCCOA policy NOT TO impersonate??
I support what you did, but we all know how aggravating some people can get and I think we all have tried different ways of getting through to people. Maybe this way was just a bad descision. I know I don't need to explain to you, I think you already know, my only question was if I made a mistake or perhaps I didn't exercise my descretion a little better, would I be held accountable forever?
Yeah, depends on the offense right??? LOL
I want to say, I don't speak for this individual, I have no affiliation with him, I was just curious to know that now that the deed is done, how does it get rectified?
05-23-2002, 09:44 AM
I have posted this answer a couple of times and I will post it here again. We (Ron D. and myself) have had NO emails from anyone complaining of not being able to get into the SCCoA forums. I have received emails from others not involved and read rumors of who might be involved, but NO communication from ANYONE who was directly affected by the IP ban. I have made mistakes in the past and discussed SCCoA business on other boards and this time I intend to keep SCCoA business confined to the SCCoA. I have also tried to keep this private, but to no avail!
The IP ban was done to flush out who was behind this and to get that individual to communicate with us here at the SCCoA. As of this post, that has NOT occurred. One email from the individual involved on the first day of the IP ban could have already solved all of these problems. Our IP ban could have also affected innocent users (like an AOL address), and we would have taken it off, if we heard from any of the users about access problems.
I will also restate that our intent was NOT to permanently ban anyone or to make anybody mad. I'm not sure what constitutes a "banning" offense (and only one person has ever been banned and that only temporarily), but this event is not one of them at this time.
We do want to make sure that everyone understands (and a high percentage of emails that I have received agree) that we take this type of "clone" user ID posting very seriously and do not welcome it here. Our current method of banning the fake user and associated IP addresses will continue anytime we see this thing happening. Even when we have a complete set of rules posted, I’m not sure every possible offense will be spelled out. Some issues still will come under “moderator discretion” and will be decided on a case-by-case basis. I’ll welcome the rules when they are finally posted, as it will make my job a lot easier. All I can do now is make my actions as clear as possible. Not everyone will agree with them, but at least they will know the answer to the all important “WHY?” question.
I hope I have made this point very clear. If not, I am always available at my email address in my signature.
Again, this is not a big deal and way too much has been made of it. Most people here just want to get on with SC business, as do I!
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.