No. It may have been a little bit in bad taste but it was done as a parody to protest how Alucard behaves on here. His profile page certainly show that he is nuttier than a squirrel turd.
If you are going to start deleting names because somebody else doesn't like it, you are going to be busy. I'D like Shadowkat removed too. :)
I think s/he shouldn't be banned.
1) S/he didn't crack Alucard's account and begin posting as him. So no admin/software damage was done.
2) It wasn't long before the difference between "Alucard" and "Alucard." was known by the membership. Thus, no board or social damage was done.
3) This really is "was Alucard damaged?" Perhaps. However, he has somewhat asked for it with multiple abuses hurled from ugly PMs calling people names to indecipherable "list" postings to calling people names in public postings.
Perhaps this event is actually a form of community self-policing.
Let me add, that both names are a pseudonym, a fictitious name. Both are posting anonymously. So no claim can be made that it is effecting their real lives.
It is easy to ignore rants. Many rants from the various colorful characters are amusing to read. I sometime bait them on myself to get them going all in fun.
Big F! If you are in the mood to watch heads roll check out Bonesbrothers comments.She's a dancer at Platinum Plus in Columbia S. Carolina and tries to come across as a male.Lives in Ohio but the only club it has reviewed is in S. Carolina. If your axe must fall I say let it be Bonesbrother.
The troll/flame accounts have recently become a problem here including the Alucard. account (note, I am referring to the *dot* account, not the actual anti-gun flake). It would be nice if there were a way to easily prevent duplicate and multiple identities, but I am not sure that is possible without a significant investment.
My default preference is that when an account is positively identified as a flamer/troll/copy account that the account is deleted. That means Alucard. (*dot*) and several others.
@dallas i think if Founder gets into deleting every account that has flamed another then a ton of accounts would have to be deleted. There are a lot of disagreements in this forum based on opinions, that could be a slippery slope.
As for "Alucard." he has just as much right to be here as "Alucard", in fact I don't know if "Alucard." has harassed nearly as many people through PM's and baiting or cheap shotting other members. "Alucard" has a history of alleged PM's harassing other members, I say alleged because I have not received any personally so while I assume it has happened I can't confirm. I think if you need to delete one of them you need to delete them both.
Hey Founder, picking off one user name after another is pointless. All it takes is one period for tons of accounts from one person. If you want to get rid of super trolls/spammers, you have to treat them like weeds; out by the roots. All in all, this site is pretty amusing.
If you banned/delete some body do bonesbrother that was an account to just attack people...his solo mission is to attack dougster and juicebox69 and say hurtful words like "Nigger"
@ime, you have a point, but I was not referring to a regular user who flames, or irritates other users. I am referring to the recent situation where someone intentionally creates an account either similar to an existing user or as a put down of an existing user, for the sole purpose of flaming or harassing others.
Disagreements are one thing, filling up the discussion board with ugly or banal comments just to harass or abuse the board is quite another. I am not suggesting any moderation/supervision of this board. I am saying that when an identity is clearly created for they sole purpose of harassing or spamming it should be deleted.
It could be simply done. When we as users identify such an account we could notify Founder who could, at his convenience, review and decide whether to delete or not delete the account.
@Corvus, Ignore works for regular posters who you dislike or find irritating, but when an individual continually creates spam accounts or harassing accounts, it doesn't stop them from filling the board, sometimes by responding to themselves.
There is no way to prevent people from "filling a board... responding to themselves" without banning IP addresses. Of course, when you do that, you are potentially banning future users.
It's better that their IP(s) sees their postings but no one else does >:).
Not only do I agree with what Jab just said, but let's be real people. This is a site filled with horny muthafuckas whose hobby is going to stripclubs. Let's not take ourselves too seriously.
Speaking of moderators, I am opposed to the concept but if we get one, here are the best candidates (in descending order):
Dougster
txtittyfag
juicebox69
It is your site do as you see fit. Has TUSCL become the type of site you desire.
It would be interesting to see the city from which a poster is posting from under their avatar.
I whole heartedly agree with dallas702’s last post.
It’s ok to disagree and everyone is entitled to their opinions – but it seems as if some just want to bomb the board with idiocy – I’m all for “works of fiction†but I’m not for bombing the board w/ pure shit.
If there was a way to efficiently delete aliases then I think it should be done since aliases usually just serve the aliaser at the expense of the general board.
"Alucard." (with dot) is a fairly recent development. So, IMO, I'm not sure how big of an abuser the 'with dot' account is. There are much worse abuser I'd prefer to seek get tossed.
Also, IMO, the real "Alucard" (no dot) isn't shy about 'hating' on people he doesn't like. Sorry, but not any sympathy here. If you disk it out, you have better be prepared to take it too.
Pretty much agree with Dallas. Don't delete accounts for being stupid, offensive, or trolling. But if there is some way to get rid of the multiples, especially the ones that are set up to bully existing members, I'd be in favor of that. Maybe a way to flag such accounts the way we now flag reviews, if that isn't too great a burden on you.
If it was "Founder." would you want it deleted? I would. The same goes for anybody else including Shadow and even Dougster. If a username is created with the obvious intent to not contribute at all to strip clubs then it shouldn't be here.
Harassing others online I thought was illegal but a lot goes on anyway. If you set up an account where it looks like the sole purpose is to harass another member, I see no problem with deleting that account.
Jokes and harassment may seem amusing until you've experienced it first hand. If it was clearly not Alucard like Alutard or some other difference and not set up solely to harass someone, I would say it would be ok.
At a minimum, I would say the harassing profile needs to go especially since it looks like it was posted to harass.
The reason I think the name needs to be more different than a single period or two is because we had this imitation problem years ago when logins were not required but were created to put an end or reduce the amount of pretending to be someone else. Just my opinion. It"s not my site.
@sharkhunter I don't think alucard. has actually said a word to alucard . Its not like its someone using someones real name. If anything Alucard has put the ALucard. on some kind of threat list from what it looks like on his profile from what I can tell.
I think slick actually hit on the head. And if Founder makes an exception for one person who knows who is gonna get deleted next. Fellas this is the internet lets calm down.
I favor deleting "Allucard." account. Plus several other screen names probably originating from same IP address. RE- urban dictionary definition #6 of spammer: "Someone who posts needless ammounts of crap on a forum." You have (apparently) deleted the accounts of past spammers, notably one or 2 whose sole purpose was to advertise another website. That fell under the more common definition of spam. But #6 is applicable to latest state of affairs whereby board has been flooded with inane posts/threads by zero/few review new screen names. I realize that you desire a high traffic count for tuscl website- well and good, except when so much useless crap crowds out legitimate discussion on stripclubs/clubbing that it detracts from original purpose of tuscl.
I recognize that you have been mostly "hands off" on moderation, but do you really want to see Tuscl become a [view link], which is little more than a juvenille chat board. Yes, ignore is a good feature (gotta love all those blue crickets). There comes a time when it is better to dig up and discard the roots rather than keep having to pull up weeds.
I guess too that you are looking at the personal harrasment angle of a paying member. IMO, taking on an identical screen name, save for the period dot for the sole purpose of mocking/satirizing them, even going to trouble to use identical avatars( to the point of timing avatar changes to match original Alucard avatar changes in latest posts) sure tickles the line between stalking/harassment, and just kidding around. I trust that you will draw on your quarter century experience of originating, and running a website to make the correct decision.
Everything that dallas, sharkhunter and minnow said. I think we all understand the desire to keep the board free from restrictive moderation, but internet discussion boards are highly susceptible to the variety of ills caused by volume posting and multiple screen names.
This is precisely why virtually all of them have at least some basic rules of the road. Otherwise, a single homebound shut-in with nothing but time to kill can quite literally clog a board at will. And if he is perpetually bored, then this can go on in perpetuity in the absence of some control mechanism. Now there may be little enough real harm in this as it has few real world implications, but it is certainly not helpful if your goal is to run a discussion board where certain industry specific topics are explored and information shared. After a while, current members just stop bothering and potential new participants see the state of affairs and just steer clear instead.
Anyway, just my two cents and thank you as always founder for supporting this resource.
Not really our decision to make, founder. This site is yours. The decision will be yours.
You will have many pieces of data to base your decision upon. I assume that you can track the number of site hits from each user; how many different users visit the site. Who knows what else you can do to support the fees you charge your advertisers?
Obviously if the number of hits from a small number of users goes into the stratosphere and the number of users declines precipitously as a result you will have a big problem with your advertisers.
Make your decision on a pure business basis. If this were my site that is what I would do.
If the number of hits grows as well as the number of users just ignore all the bitchiness.
When I get annoyed with tuscl I just absent myself from the site for a month/6 weeks. I do not use the ignore feature.
Does this discussion board nonsense affect the income stream from the 1 and 1 reviewers or any of the review-only members?
It would be nice if people talking about IP addresses had a basic clue WTF they were talking about. Changing IP addresses is trivial in an age of ubiquitous mobile device, proxies, and people otherwise using machines which may not be their own. Do an IP ban and you may block some innocents but certainly not someone determined to get around it. For the same reason, even identifying which aliases belong to the same person in the first place is basically just guesswork. And going based on the suspicions of some of the borderline paranoid minds here...
I'll give and example. I think rickdugan and HungryGiraffe are the same person. Their clubbing area is nearly the same. Prove they are not otherwise delete one of the aliases! Starting to see the problems?
Alucard and I have agreed to disagree about gun rights.
Just because I disagree, doesn't mean I can post pages and pages of harassing information about someone.
However I have wondered if he thinks stun guns are ok. Kind of like a phaser set to stun instead of kill. Maybe he'd rather have Captain Kirk go down defenseless to an unknown alien world and take the rest of the commanding officers with him. In today's world, that would be like Obama and his administration going to visit Syria with a stun gun and no secret service.
I often joked with friends how unrealistic the old Star Trek was in having the Captain and all the commanders, chief engineer, head doctor, etc, go down to an unknown possibly hostile planet. If Star Trek was more like real life, the president or Captain would be off on the golf course or visiting a foreign country vacationing with the wife and kids while others did the work.
I think the satire value "Alucard." provides more than outweighs whatever minor annoyance he causes to "Alucard" so I say don't delete. Now if it was another user, one who truly was an innocent being picked in things might be different. But alutard, clearly and constantly provokes fights like this that he wants to lose, so in this case it's hard to feel any kind if sympathy for him as we might if it was a person who is not constantly trying to stir up trouble. All the alias is doing is playing by the same sit of rules that "Alucard" does, so u say let Alucard sleep in the bed he made for herself.
I agree with txtittyfag....& would like to throw on that he should be moderator. Also ban juicebox.... Who else would tell founder to ban the aliases he created!
Too bad you can't read, jestie.
I really don't care if there is one. I'll just tell you right now, since you clearly have no idea what an IP address even is that it will do nothing to stop multiple aliases. But, hey, if some will be surprised to learn that it does nothing to fix the problem go for it! Heck, i'll support it!
Founder... as others have mentioned this is your site and you should do what is best for the site in general and your financial interests.
I don't generally have any problem with other people on this board or in real life.
I will say that Alucard has abused the ignore system in a big way. He has sent me as well as others harrassing p.m.'s then puts us on ignore so we can't respond. He keeps this up intil someone threatens to make his p.m's public or some have had to follow thru with these threats in order to stop his harassment. If he is sending you p.m's and bitching about the Alucard. With a period he has no room to talk. He is just getting a small and well deserved taste of what he has done.
One other person that is abusive on here is Bonebrother. This person is extremely racist and hateful. I generally don't appreciate bonenrothers comments.
That is my opinion. Please take it for what it is worth.
I
OP = "Posting as others: Re: Alucard." I read it as should Founder require users to CHANGE user name [NOT BAN the user] when that user chooses a name that is easily confused with another's already chosen name? Issue is similar to using very close copy of Apple logo even if it's not for computing related product. Issue ISN'T about banning for CONTENT posted.
I say yes. So Alucard(.) must change name but isn't banned if he/she does so.
"ShadowKat"? Close call... but I'd say: Stay on board BUT change your name to something more unique... or get bounced.
I use the IGNORE button for spammers whether advertisers or " #6 of spammer: "Someone who posts needless amounts of crap on a forum."
If I see a poster repeatedly disrupt the flow of discussions or post "needless amounts of crap on a forum." I use ignore. It's not so much about the content as it is about the distracting crapola because I want to enjoy discussions rather than stop reading TUSCL for a month or so.
Protect the right to satire! No ban/mandatory name change! Joker's windbaggery is particularly flawed, as usual, since their is obviously nothing finance at stake with the similar names.
78 comments