People who should be banned

Why don't you tighten up your regulations
so that people who are banned cannot rejoin under another name?

I have been looking at the various fora and the comments
made there about people rejoining under different names
and being banned again.

If you are serious about having a good clean decent site
why don't you tighten up your regulations so that when people
want to rejoin they have to supply you with information that
can identify them instantly and can therefore bar them before
they can commit more serious transgressions and cause more
harm and insult to those decent folk who want to enjoy this site
for what it truly should be?

Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
Why don't you tighten up your regulations
so that people who are banned cannot rejoin under another name?

I have been looking at the various fora and the comments
made there about people rejoining under different names
and being banned again.

If you are serious about having a good clean decent site
why don't you tighten up your regulations ...[text shortened]...
harm and insult to those decent folk who want to enjoy this site
for what it truly should be?

i get your point and support it in theory. However, i don't see an easy way to apply that ID filter all that easily. for instance, if i happen to be banned and decide to return, what's to stop me from registering some bogus name and password? the ISP? I'm no techie, but i can imagine problems with that . . . such as publicly available machines in libraries and other places. multiple users in a family or at a location. also aren't there ways of masking the ISP? again, i'm no techie, but i understand there are ways to do that, maybe as easy as "browse in private," no?

Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
Why don't you tighten up your regulations
so that people who are banned cannot rejoin under another name?

I have been looking at the various fora and the comments
made there about people rejoining under different names
and being banned again.

If you are serious about having a good clean decent site
why don't you tighten up your regulations ...[text shortened]...
harm and insult to those decent folk who want to enjoy this site
for what it truly should be?

When it comes to registration, the site owner wants that to be the easiest thing in the world to do, especially when they'll pay for a subscription.

Putting in a more restrictive registration process risks false-positives, and lost business ... and for what? A few people who have had more than one username, most of whom are harmless because they don't use more than one at the same time.

Better to catch them later and then ban, if necessary.

Originally posted by coquette
i get your point and support it in theory. However, i don't see an easy way to apply that ID filter all that easily. for instance, if i happen to be banned and decide to return, what's to stop me from registering some bogus name and password? the ISP? I'm no techie, but i can imagine problems with that . . . such as publicly available machines in libraries ...[text shortened]... no techie, but i understand there are ways to do that, maybe as easy as "browse in private," no?

Yes, it's pretty easy to camouflage your IP address...Just use a VPN (virtual private network), or access the site via a proxy server.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Better to catch them later and then ban, if necessary.

But this never happens, as long as they're paying.

People have admitted being 3(a)s without anything being done.

Originally posted by Suzianne
But this never happens, as long as they're paying.

People have admitted being 3(a)s without anything being done.

In most cases, nothing should be done.

3a's who come back as another account and no longer use their old account aren't hurting anything. Let's save the bans for spammers / harassers and cheats.