# Returning after being banned



## zimzum42 (13 May 2009)

It's obvious that it's quite easy to return to the fold after being banned (I'm talking permanent bans here)

It's fairly obvious when someone does return, they jump straight into P+L, and already 'know the score' with other forum members etc...

I don't see how any normal member would jump straight into P+L, since everyone should be coming here to chat about cycling, the P+L thing should develop over time...

Could not something be done about this by restricting access to P+L until a member has made a certain number of posts in other fora, or perhaps after the member has been registered for a certain period of time?

The likes of Spinners would give themselves away no doubt as they are incapable of posting without invective, and this would stand out a mile in other fora


----------



## yello (13 May 2009)

I don't see the difference zim; P&L is one of the fora just like the rest. So they post shite in cafe before posting shite in P&L... or they post shite directly in P&L. It amounts to the same either way doesn't it?


----------



## Steve Austin (13 May 2009)

the problem with making new members post a certain amount before they can access other areas, is they will post a certain amount of gibberish all over the place before they can then run free in P&L

It could be argued a lot of members post a lot of gibberish anyway 

Trolls do reveal themselves quite quickly, and its pretty obvious which new members are trolling by where and what they post. 

Zim If there is anyone you think may be trolling or suspect, report it. I suspect there are mods who will take direct action and ban them instantly.


----------



## mr Mag00 (13 May 2009)

ignore them?


----------



## jay clock (13 May 2009)

It is quite simple. Go into the bits of the forum that talk about cycling. If you want an argument, go to the pub. If someone in the real cycling bits of the forum starts being an arse, close down the web browser and have a bike ride. When you come back, don't bother reading that thread. 

You can choose which fora are searched on latest posts, and you can block individuals. I am here daily and cannot think who the problem is, so I must have avoided them quite successfully.


----------



## bonj2 (13 May 2009)

In other words, simoncc liked this forum so much the possibility that he would just forget it is minimal, so let's have a witch hunt to find out who he is


----------



## Shaun (13 May 2009)

It _is_ technically possible to limit access to forums based on number of posts, etc. however I think it's probably best just to report anyone you suspect of being previously banned and let me and the mods deal with it.

I assume this all ties-in with the Poll in P&L?

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## tdr1nka (13 May 2009)

It makes me laugh that repeat offenders come back to P&L to cause trouble while seeming to have a certain respect for the rest of the forum?


----------



## zimzum42 (15 May 2009)

Admin said:


> It _is_ technically possible to limit access to forums based on number of posts, etc. however I think it's probably best just to report anyone you suspect of being previously banned and let me and the mods deal with it.
> 
> I assume this all ties-in with the Poll in P&L?
> 
> ...


It's pretty obvious that lech is Spindrift, so I reckon he ought to be removed...


----------



## Shaun (15 May 2009)

zimzum42 said:


> It's pretty obvious that lech is Spindrift, so I reckon he ought to be removed...



Well, technically, no it isn't obvious at all. _(The usual tests have already been done and _prove_ that lech has no relationship with Spindrift at all - technically!!)_

Posting _style_ however is an altogether different, and less exact science, and primarily relies on experience and instinct.

For me to ban someone based on other people’s instincts I need to be properly convinced that we're not banning a new member who just happens to come across in a similar fashion to a previously banned one.

Believe me when I say that lech is well and truly on the radar and if me and the mods concur with your thoughts at some point in the future then a ban will ensue.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## bonj2 (15 May 2009)

Admin said:


> Well, technically, no it isn't obvious at all. _(The usual tests have already been done and _prove_ that lech has no relationship with Spindrift at all - technically!!)_



<pedantic>
it doesn't prove that he has no relationship with him, at all - it simply DOESN'T prove that he HAS got a relationship with him
</pedantic>


----------



## bonj2 (15 May 2009)

Similarities:
Single posts containing just a link to liveleak e.g. http://cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=716366
Copy and paste from news articles: e.g. http://cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=716303
Militantly in favour of speed cameras: http://cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=715253#post715253
Links to 'this is london': http://cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=712814#post712814

obviously bimbly.


----------



## zimzum42 (15 May 2009)

Admin said:


> Well, technically, no it isn't obvious at all. _(The usual tests have already been done and _prove_ that lech has no relationship with Spindrift at all - technically!!)_
> 
> Posting _style_ however is an altogether different, and less exact science, and primarily relies on experience and instinct.
> 
> ...


His IP address or whatever may well be different, but a new member launching straight into P+L, posting huge tracts of cut and paste in exactly the same style and on exactly the same topics as Spinners used to, it seems patently obvious to me.....

Why would a new member launch straight into P+L with a polemic about the policing of the G20? I admire your desire to see the best in everyone, but it's obvious that lech is Spinners. In interests of fairness, it's obvious that very-near is LLB, and I can't remember the moniker, but SimonCC is clearly on here somewhere too. If a ban is a ban, then something ought to be done.
I got banned for a weekend, fair enough, but I didn't log on as someone else and start posting carp...


----------



## Crackle (15 May 2009)

zimzum42 said:


> SimonCC is clearly on here somewhere too.



Yes I rather think he is but playing different characters, one I think has been rumbled and not since appeared and I'm kinda suspicious of another.


----------



## Shaun (15 May 2009)

zimzum42 said:


> His IP address or whatever may well be different, but a new member launching straight into P+L, posting huge tracts of cut and paste in exactly the same style and on exactly the same topics as Spinners used to, it seems patently obvious to me.....
> 
> Why would a new member launch straight into P+L with a polemic about the policing of the G20? I admire your desire to see the best in everyone, but it's obvious that lech is Spinners. In interests of fairness, it's obvious that very-near is LLB, and I can't remember the moniker, but SimonCC is clearly on here somewhere too. If a ban is a ban, then something ought to be done.
> I got banned for a weekend, fair enough, but I didn't log on as someone else and start posting carp...



Yes, which is why I said:



admin said:


> Believe me when I say that lech is well and truly on the radar and if me and the mods concur with your thoughts at some point in the future then a ban will ensue.



From my point of view, I want to know that if I ban someone I am doing so with at least a reasonably amount of surity that it is the previously banned user.

If this proves to be the case with lech, then eventually it will become evident and action will be taken.

Consideration must also be given to the idea though, that some people can return to CC after a previous ban - unbeknownst to the general membership (and even me and the mods) - and get along with everyone just fine.

I know what you're saying; if it looks like a Spindrift, posts like a Spindrift, and spends all it's time in P&L like a Spindrift - then it must surely be a Spindrift?

That's entirely possible, but I just want to be sure.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## zimzum42 (16 May 2009)

Fair enuff!


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 May 2009)

zimzum42 said:


> I got banned for a weekend, fair enough, but I didn't log on as someone else and start posting carp...



If you had it would have been very fishy...


----------



## Flying_Monkey (17 May 2009)

I hope that, rather than worrying about Lech / Spinners, admin can do something about the genuine and recurrent troll we have who seems to have multiple IDs stored up and ready to use (yes I know, what kind of a weirdo with no life does that, but someone i.e.: Paganini AKA Softpeadals AKA Paxos AKA Bogroll AKA Big Duck... seems to have nothing better to do).


----------



## Shaun (18 May 2009)

Flying_Monkey said:


> I hope that, rather than worrying about Lech / Spinners, admin can do something about the genuine and recurrent troll we have who seems to have multiple IDs stored up and ready to use (yes I know, what kind of a weirdo with no life does that, but someone i.e.: Paganini AKA Softpeadals AKA Paxos AKA Bogroll AKA Big Duck... seems to have nothing better to do).



I've taken further steps, but am also considering speaking with his ISP. 

I'll PM you if anything comes of it.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## Flying_Monkey (18 May 2009)

Cheers, Shaun.


----------



## Arch (18 May 2009)

zimzum42 said:


> In interests of fairness, it's obvious that very-near is LLB



In the interests of information, I don't think LLB was ever banned, I think he went off for a bit and then came back as a new person.


----------



## zimzum42 (18 May 2009)

OK, I thought he had been forced out!


----------



## Arch (18 May 2009)

zimzum42 said:


> OK, I thought he had been forced out!



No, I think 'flounced' is more the word...


----------



## bonj2 (19 May 2009)

he claimed he forgot his password.


----------



## Sh4rkyBloke (19 May 2009)

bonj said:


> he claimed he forgot his password.


...surely "4x4" isn't that hard to remember...


----------



## Arch (19 May 2009)

bonj said:


> he claimed he forgot his password.



Did he?

Hmmm. Someone who only posted rarely, maybe - I forgot my password for Facebook, because I didn't ever use it...


----------



## Abitrary (20 May 2009)

I think it's unfair and a bit snidey that people accuse other people of being people that should or have been banned.

Could we not have some sort of system where anyone who accuses someone of being bannable gets put up for a ban as well? A bit like big brother?

If fact, why don't we make it a proper BB competition. The bannables nominate each other and the innocent public decide who should be evicted?


----------



## dellzeqq (21 May 2009)

Arch said:


> Did he?
> 
> Hmmm. Someone who only posted rarely, maybe - I forgot my password for Facebook, because I didn't ever use it...


if fairness he took a bit of a pasting and told us that he's wasted enough time here. Nobody asked him to leave.


----------



## Arch (21 May 2009)

dellzeqq said:


> if fairness he took a bit of a pasting and told us that he's wasted enough time here. Nobody asked him to leave.



I know, that's why I made the point about him not being banned. I was just suggesting that forgetting his password was perhaps less likely for such a regular poster.


----------

