I've just read the closed thread OP again. In fact, let me paste it in ...
It has long been acknowledged that several not606 members have alternate accounts, most often it has been overlooked but when an alternate or second account is used to create a second identity for the sole purpose of disruption then it will always result in an instant ban.
The disruption over the weekend with members trying to cause havoc with the match day thread and stirring up other members caused us to look deeper at a few accounts. It was discovered that Eric Le Merde was a fake account, he wasn’t some supporter living in Australia, he was actually hiding behind a VPN.
Late yesterday evening two of the mods dropped hints to the fake account (Eric Le Merde) in the hope that he would delete it and come clean before it brought in the attention of the Supermods. They totally ignored these gentle nudges so it left no alternative but to pass the whole of Sunday and Mondays findings on to both Supermods.
The result of the events has lead to instant bans to the accounts of Glory and Eric Le Merde, we suspect there could be more fake accounts associated with these two and they will suffer the same fate once the same checks have been carried out and proven.
In regards to the match day threads, we have agreed to relax the rules, on a match by match basis, post sensibly and don’t allow it to get out of hand and things will be fine.
Not happy that the thread has been closed. Why close it & why the rush? I think we're entitled to have ask a few questions & get them answered. Put it this way, a few PMs have flown about, and support a number of posts that have been made in a similar vein. In short, they all say much the same thing - that this doesn't sound right at all.
* Glory with a second account? Possible, but he won't be the first.
* Eric not living in Oz? Possible, but given his apparently detailed familiarity with the area & the culture, unlikely.
* Glory's second account? Really?
* Eric disruptive? Are you serious?
* Eric working in conjunction with Glory? Nah, more likely for Whitejock to be Glory's second account.
I'm sorry, but with the limited information given to us, this seems like a cock and bull fairy story. Do you really expect us to believe this?
* Where's the evidence?
* What did they have to say for themselves?
* Did either admit it?
* Are all of us liable to be banned if we are disruptive? (is that me gone for this post?)
* What is disruptive, btw?
* Disruptive to whom?
* Where are all these rules we're supposed to follow?
* How can you be banned for breaking rules that don't exist?
* How long are these bans for? Sine die?
* How do you know how long you're banned for if no-one tells you?
* What is the ban structure, should we break one of these invisible rules? Sine die for everything?
* Is there a right of appeal, should you be banned?
* Who made these banning orders - our mods or the supermods?
* Was it unanimous?
* Are more bans expected to follow for similar 'offences'?
Now I'm no great fan of Glory's online persona, as you all know, but even I can see that he'd make better use of 'Eric', if that was his intention. Bit of a slow burner that one, if Eric was indeed always intended to be 'disruptive'. 4 years, to be precise - and over 7k posts. Deep undercover that one! (Hard for us to judge if everything was deleted, btw). Even if it was, do you get banned for one night's excess? If it was excess? Bit hard to take.
I'm not going to go away, btw. I'm absolutely disgusted. I feel it's only fair these questions should get answered. I will keep asking them, right up until I get banned for ever for being disruptive. Please feel free to join in, fellow 606ers.
It has long been acknowledged that several not606 members have alternate accounts, most often it has been overlooked but when an alternate or second account is used to create a second identity for the sole purpose of disruption then it will always result in an instant ban.
The disruption over the weekend with members trying to cause havoc with the match day thread and stirring up other members caused us to look deeper at a few accounts. It was discovered that Eric Le Merde was a fake account, he wasn’t some supporter living in Australia, he was actually hiding behind a VPN.
Late yesterday evening two of the mods dropped hints to the fake account (Eric Le Merde) in the hope that he would delete it and come clean before it brought in the attention of the Supermods. They totally ignored these gentle nudges so it left no alternative but to pass the whole of Sunday and Mondays findings on to both Supermods.
The result of the events has lead to instant bans to the accounts of Glory and Eric Le Merde, we suspect there could be more fake accounts associated with these two and they will suffer the same fate once the same checks have been carried out and proven.
In regards to the match day threads, we have agreed to relax the rules, on a match by match basis, post sensibly and don’t allow it to get out of hand and things will be fine.
Not happy that the thread has been closed. Why close it & why the rush? I think we're entitled to have ask a few questions & get them answered. Put it this way, a few PMs have flown about, and support a number of posts that have been made in a similar vein. In short, they all say much the same thing - that this doesn't sound right at all.
* Glory with a second account? Possible, but he won't be the first.
* Eric not living in Oz? Possible, but given his apparently detailed familiarity with the area & the culture, unlikely.
* Glory's second account? Really?
* Eric disruptive? Are you serious?
* Eric working in conjunction with Glory? Nah, more likely for Whitejock to be Glory's second account.
I'm sorry, but with the limited information given to us, this seems like a cock and bull fairy story. Do you really expect us to believe this?
* Where's the evidence?
* What did they have to say for themselves?
* Did either admit it?
* Are all of us liable to be banned if we are disruptive? (is that me gone for this post?)
* What is disruptive, btw?
* Disruptive to whom?
* Where are all these rules we're supposed to follow?
* How can you be banned for breaking rules that don't exist?
* How long are these bans for? Sine die?
* How do you know how long you're banned for if no-one tells you?
* What is the ban structure, should we break one of these invisible rules? Sine die for everything?
* Is there a right of appeal, should you be banned?
* Who made these banning orders - our mods or the supermods?
* Was it unanimous?
* Are more bans expected to follow for similar 'offences'?
Now I'm no great fan of Glory's online persona, as you all know, but even I can see that he'd make better use of 'Eric', if that was his intention. Bit of a slow burner that one, if Eric was indeed always intended to be 'disruptive'. 4 years, to be precise - and over 7k posts. Deep undercover that one! (Hard for us to judge if everything was deleted, btw). Even if it was, do you get banned for one night's excess? If it was excess? Bit hard to take.
I'm not going to go away, btw. I'm absolutely disgusted. I feel it's only fair these questions should get answered. I will keep asking them, right up until I get banned for ever for being disruptive. Please feel free to join in, fellow 606ers.
peace and love fellow posters.
