<p>Yeah, horrible name I know. I want to make a vote to ban people who are clearly dupes but we don't have rock solid, titanium solid proof. It's clear they are trolling/ a dupe, but we don't have them saying "Hey, I am [Insert_User_Here]" so we can't ban them. Please Vote
</p><p>
</p><p>A. Yes (1)
</p><p>B. No (like, 23)
</p><p>C. Neutral
</p><p>D. Other (please specify)
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Consensus">Consensus</span></h2>
<p>No.
</p>
5,988
pages
ALL POSTS
<div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">BrickfilmNut wrote:
B. Whether somebody is a dupe or not isn't something to be paranoid over, unless it's <i>causing a problem</i>. And if it's causing a problem, well, then that would imply that there's enough reason to block/ban/whatever.</div>In almost all cases dupes would be outlawed by the policies and apparently forgetting about LMBW:UCS is a requirement for rights now so that policy barely exists (still makes sense to vote b tho)
</div> <p>No, I get that it's outlawed, and I get <i>why</i> too. :P But it sometimes seems like in a lot of cases, people feel a dupe needs to be banned just 'cause the rules say, whether or not the dupe is causing the trouble that dupes, in cases of the rules' validity, tend to do. </p>
<div class="quote">BrickfilmNut wrote:
B. Whether somebody is a dupe or not isn't something to be paranoid over, unless it's <i>causing a problem</i>. And if it's causing a problem, well, then that would imply that there's enough reason to block/ban/whatever.</div>In almost all cases dupes would be outlawed by the policies and apparently forgetting about LMBW:UCS is a requirement for rights now so that policy barely exists (still makes sense to vote b tho)
</div> <p>No, I get that it's outlawed, and I get <i>why</i> too. :P But it sometimes seems like in a lot of cases, people feel a dupe needs to be banned just 'cause the rules say, whether or not the dupe is causing the trouble that dupes, in cases of the rules' validity, tend to do. </p>
(Edited by BrickfilmNut)
<p>B.
</p><p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all...
</p>
(Edited by Goggles99)
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div> <p>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</p>
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div> <p>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</p>
(Edited by ShadowOfOblivion7119)
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div> <p>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</p>
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div> <p>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</p>
(Edited by Nightfall395)
<div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div> <p>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </p>
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div> <p>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </p>
(Edited by ShadowOfOblivion7119)
0
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </div> <p>Well if they are a troll then its usualy a good thing if they leave.
</p><noscript>
</noscript> Also, they can still be checked after they leave.
<div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </div> <p>Well if they are a troll then its usualy a good thing if they leave.
</p><noscript></noscript> Also, they can still be checked after they leave.
(Edited by Avalair)
<div class="quote">
<p>ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div> <p>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </p> </div> <p>Well then, if they're not causing trouble, you can wait for a CU to come back on. If they are causing trouble, they'll likely be banned anyways. </p>
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div> <p>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </p> </div> <p>Well then, if they're not causing trouble, you can wait for a CU to come back on. If they are causing trouble, they'll likely be banned anyways. </p>
(Edited by Dr. Shady)
<div class="quote">LilCaSh15 wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </div>Well then, if they're not causing trouble, you can wait for a CU to come back on. If they are causing trouble, they'll likely be banned anyways. </div> <p>They can cause trouble without directly violating the rules.
</p>
<div class="quote"> <p>ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </div>Well then, if they're not causing trouble, you can wait for a CU to come back on. If they are causing trouble, they'll likely be banned anyways. </div> <p>They can cause trouble without directly violating the rules.
</p>
(Edited by ShadowOfOblivion7119)
<div class="quote">Avalair wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked!</div>Well if they are a troll then its usualy a good thing if they leave. Also, they can still be checked after they leave.
</div>
<p>But if we don't dish out bans and stuff, then they won't learn!
</p>
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked!</div>Well if they are a troll then its usualy a good thing if they leave.
Also, they can still be checked after they leave.
</div>
<p>But if we don't dish out bans and stuff, then they won't learn!</p>
(Edited by ShadowOfOblivion7119)
<div class="quote">
<p>ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">LilCaSh15 wrote:
<div class="quote"> <p>ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </div>Well then, if they're not causing trouble, you can wait for a CU to come back on. If they are causing trouble, they'll likely be banned anyways. </div> <p>They can cause trouble without directly violating the rules.
</p> </div> <p>Then the mods can use the common sense policy to ban them </p>
<div class="quote"> <p>ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote: </p> <div class="quote">Nightfall395 wrote:
<div class="quote">ShadowOfOblivion7119 wrote:
<div class="quote">Goggles99 wrote:
B. <p>If we don't use solid proof to determine if someone is a dupe and should be banned....then... what <i>do</i> we use?? A hunch? A slight suspicion? I can't see how this could be fair or feasible at all... </p> </div>We don't need the dupes to say "Oh hey guys, I'm" and something. We can determine based on their behavior, username and more. We don't need them to just shout "HEY WORLD, I AM" or something. Something like this happened in chat, so I wanted a vote.
</div>once again can you acknowledge the existence of cu for once
</div>
They are so little, and we don't always have enough time for a CU because they leave before they can be checked! </div>Well then, if they're not causing trouble, you can wait for a CU to come back on. If they are causing trouble, they'll likely be banned anyways. </div> <p>They can cause trouble without directly violating the rules.
</p> </div> <p>Then the mods can use the common sense policy to ban them </p>
(Edited by Dr. Shady)