Well, I have to say that forensic analysis aside, the evidence against it is that S registered before M started posting. M only posted in the Firefly thread, whereas S has been in several threads throughout the board. S has said nothing to indicate knowledge of what went on with M, which I expect would be an easy mistake to make.

I'm aware of the evidence for: similarity in posting/discussion styles, uses the same ISP & lives in the same city.

I tend to go with ita on this. I've been through the ringer in the past on the whole IP address/sock-puppet issue. I've been unfairly charged of sock-puppetry and banned from a mailing list for association with people accused of sock-puppetry. And yes, the accusations were based on claims that the bad person used the same ISP as my listmember: there was no proof, and what there was was manufactured, misunderstood, and blown out of proportion. It was an unholy mess, it went on for months, and it's still out there, unresolved. Once such an accusation is made public there's no way to disprove it.

So, yeah. We got no proof and S has done nothing worthy of suspension. Let's give each other the benefit of the doubt and move on.

I agree that the pseud accusations, unless they can be proven, can only create tension.

I don't doubt this - I'm just wondering what, if anything, we do about it. But it sounds like the answer is, not much.

How exactly do we prove it, ita? .... I think it's a match.

There's too much room between "prove" and "think" for me, personally.

Ask Cindy -- IIRC she's been on the receiving end of "similarities" with another poster at another board.

Frankly, I do think the burden of proof lies on the accuser, and maintain that treating poster A like poster B without any such backup is unfair. And treating poster A in a hostile manner counts as a pretty personal attack, in my book.

Well, I have to say that forensic analysis aside, the evidence against it is that S registered before M started posting.

Not true. S. is user number 666.

I'm aware of the evidence for: similarity in posting/discussion styles, uses the same ISP & lives in the same city.

And the canasta thing.

First place S. posted was here, IIRC, specifically asking etiquette questions.

I don't doubt this - I'm just wondering what, if anything, we do about it. But it sounds like the answer is, not much.

And this combined with

Once such an accusation is made public there's no way to disprove it.

is the problem, such as I see it. I have no answers, just a wish for short-term limited omniscience.

There's too much room between "prove" and "think" for me, personally.

I get that. I haven't personally experienced the kind of mayhem that comes with mischievious sockpuppetry or the paranoia and false accusations but I believe it. I guess I'm just wondering out loud whether we're making a conscious choice to tolerate the potential of abuse here, to avoid the worse damage that comes from making unsubstantiated accusations. Or if there's an element of tightening registration protocols that would be effective (I presume not, or we'd have them in place) or if there's a tech fix (again, I presume not, since this came up with caching the ISP addresses).

First place S. posted was here, IIRC, specifically asking etiquette questions.

And this was the last place M posted. After he created a pseud and came back after his banning. Okay, now I'm really done with this subject.

I guess I'm just wondering out loud whether we're making a conscious choice to tolerate the potential of abuse here, to avoid the worse damage that comes from making unsubstantiated accusations.

That's something I think I would be willing to do.

That's something I think I would be willing to do.

Me too. Despite the evidence of my post immediately above Heather's. I grasp the inherent dangers.

I get your feelings too. I don't think I saw the stuff in Firefly (?), but I saw the discussion here. It made me tense, I thought it was dropped, then it was on again. The "don't get your panties in a bunch" thing made me cringe, because I knew it was potentially offensive.

Frankly, I do think the burden of proof lies on the accuser, and maintain that treating poster A like poster B without any such backup is unfair. And treating poster A in a hostile manner counts as a pretty personal attack, in my book.

And once again, I love ita.

Not that I ever stopped, mind you!