I was going on your premise of calling the cops on some guy in a moustache.

And I used the idea of the fake moustache as an example of an ineffective and easily-seen-through disguise.

In this case the previous guy talked often about playing Yahoo online Canasta. It's pretty obscure. I don't think any other poster has ever mentioned playing Canasta in all the years I've been a Buffista. But it's not just Canasta, it's Yahoo online Canasta.

So now the guy in the fake moustache is coming by my house and quietly humming the same song he used to play on the boombox when he woke me up in the middle of the night. And it's not a well-known song. It really starts to look not only like it's the same guy, but that he's taunting us with "clues" that he's the same guy.

Just because someone can lie, doesn't mean you don't ask the question. In civil proceedings a fact-finder may draw a negative inference from a refusal to testify. If a poster ignores a stompy foot's legitimate inquiry, it's suspicious no matter who the individual might be. In the context of the eerie winking neighbor, if the cops come and he refuses to identify himself or cooperate with the officer he will be arrested.

John said he wasn't going to, Jess.

I meant bringing it up at all.

And What Steph Said -- this must be dropped.

it sounds like your mind is pretty made up. How is anyone supposed to answer that? If you have evidence about it from the email, I would like to know what that is

I am not posting here about anything in the email. I was purely talking about hypotheticals.

The coincidences others have mentioned are that they

• come from the same city
• use the same ISP
• Have the same really obscure hobby

And I didn't even collect those.

And your response if he insists on being innocent, as anyone in this country has the right to do?

Now this would be a good topic for a politics thread. Civil liberties vs. societal enforcement of community standards.

And What Steph Said -- this must be dropped.

I respect your opinions, and Steph's, but "must"?

If it is the guy, he's insulting us every day. Maybe I have an over-developed sense of betrayal, but I hate that idea so much that it will be really hard for me to behave normally around him in threads.

And What Steph Said -- this must be dropped.

But, clearly, John's not going to drop it. And I don't really feel comfortable dropping my opposition to his stance. Schmoker's playing by the rules. No one will never be able to prove definitively that he is or is not mieskie.

Betrayal? Because he's making an effort to fit into a community after, as you allege, being stupid in public?

I agree, I don't see it as a betrayal. If they're the same person, he's making a choice I would not make in terms of posting where he shouldn't, but he's also contributing to the community. Which is the goal we were trying to reach with the banning, anyhow.