Getting annoyed about sockpuppets to the point of forcing debates and votes strikes me as the most trivial use of post time I can imagine.

I disagree. I wouldn't have put a proposal on the table myself, but I think this is certainly worth a formal discussion. We're an Internet forum. We aren't going to vote on how to cure cancer. Policy changes are by definition lightbulb-worthy.

I also trust that as a community we'd deal with one as we'd deal with any truly nasty poster.

True, but ... why leave the door open for that? It seems to me that banning sockpuppets prevents the possibility of abuse and hurts exactly no one, since you could still roleplay in Sang Sacre or on another forum if it makes you happy. Given our talky meat tendencies, I don't think we're in danger of legislating against lower-case logins, or whatever.

Clovis, Ferrets, Zombies, and God have been here as long as I have. I think this IS part of our community vibe.

I feel like one or two posts every blue moon from a sockpuppet whose "real" identity is easily sussed out creates a different vibe than having a new sockpuppet every other week.

So does that mean that, if this passes, I need to pick a single user name and then, probably, limit what threads I post in?

Kristen, if I were God of the board (so very not, obviously) I would exempt pseuds that were used for privacy reasons and fairly obviously linked. But I don't know how to write the proposal that way.

ION, the word sockpuppet is starting to look funny.

One thing I find annoying about SPs, is it seems to me to foster that whole elite thing we typically eschew (cool kids and all.) The folks who make sock puppets are always the old timers who were around before this board, and I don't think it would work as well if everybody started doing it.

We all make jokes and enjoy being COMMed. But do you really think SPs would be fun if everybody started using them all the time?

But do you really think SPs would be fun if everybody started using them all the time?

Depends on how funny the posts are.

I feel like one or two posts every blue moon from a sockpuppet whose "real" identity is easily sussed out creates a different vibe than having a new sockpuppet every other week.

This was made in reference to Clovis, Ferrets, and Zombies.

I don't know who any of the controllers of there are. I thought I did at one point, but I found out much later that I was wrong. Still find them funny. Knowing the identity isn't so much an issue for me.

Poor Sean, dreaming of the days of liberty and justice for all. Power to the people, brother.

honestly, bringing something up is not squashing your freedoms. or wait, are you being funny?

We don't like sockpuppets = we're oversensitive.

imo, suggesting that this discussion or even the implementation of Betsy's proposal word for word would strip anyone of "liberty and justice" = complete overreaction.

it's a freaking online community board, not the halls of justice in some crunchy universe.

damn the man, and all that. wait a minute - it is comical.

What makes a universe crunchy?

I think this is a very valuable discussion to have. This may wind up being one of the healthier discussions we've had. It could also end up being the worst. Time will tell.

And I get that a fair number of people are really upset by sockpuppets, and I think that's legitimate.

I just have grave doubts that an offical policy against them is the best answer.

And no, I still don't have a better suggestion.

What makes a universe crunchy?

Snap, Crackle, and Pop.

We don't like sockpuppets = we're oversensitive.

I don't think this is the case, and I personally don't think that you or Lyra or Jess or ita or lori or anyone who has voiced a firm anti-sockpuppet opinion is oversensitive. I hope none of my posts prompted you to say that, because that's not what I think.

or wait, are you being funny?

I'll concede I'm being witty. As for the rest of it, I'm trending towards fairly serious. You're asking me to modify my theoretical behavior because you find it icky, when the option exists for you to either ignore my behavior or to call me on it when such behavior appears. Or, for silly illustration, "You, don't wear plaid, I can't abide plaid. Oh, sorry, you love plaid? Too bad."

Yes, I find your objections trending towards oversensitive. You find my statements to be overreactions. We may both be right. So who gets to be wrong?