pr*f*r*nt**l v*t*ng

Doesn't affect what's on the ballot.

Well, we don't have that right now Cindy and I'm trying to work within the system here.

I also think that it could be a simple addition to the registration info that doesn't even mention sock-puppets, but merely says something along the lines of "Users with multiple accounts are requested to make a note they they are the same person in the user profile"

I haven't been vocal about the entire situation/discussion because it didn't really bother me too much. The March/Universe SP's were funny because of the conversations going on in Bitches, so I didn't mind. As someone mentioned earlier, though, it can create an out-of-the-loop feeling for those who don't figure out who the real person is in other scenarios. [And honestly, because of the short time that I've been involved on chat boards, I didn't even know there was a name for it.]

In any case, I feel that the rules that are in place are adequate to deal with any problems that the SP's might cause, and by going with NoiseDesign's suggestion we are making a general statement about multiple accounts being acknowledged and not putting the specific idea of "sockpuppets" into someone's head.

I think it is inappropriate and insensitive that we continue to use the pejorative term "sockpuppet" for these discussions and suggest that we adopt the term "differently-identitied".

Either that, or Cockpuppet.

Cockpuppet.

Between that and

I'ma reiterate what I've said many times in the past: penii are weird as hell. I mean, I like them, don't get me wrong, but they're weird-looking and -- no external body part should move on its own like that, as often as it does.

I'm sensing a trend. Also, snerk.

When a sockpuppet appears I could shout "Hey Bozo! It's customary to disclose your board name in your profile," or something.

if someone said this to me, I'd say "it's not written anywhere. how the hell do you crazy b.orgers expect anyone to know what is expected?"

The whole numberslutting thing is customary around here too. Do we have a line item for that?

ND, I think our rules say that everything needs to pass with a true majority (more than 50 percent of the votes, no preference exempted). For that reason, almost every ballot we've had has been worded as yes/no choices. Which doesn't prevent Betsy from giving us three or 47 choices, should that be her wont, but it does mean that a ballot with more than two choices is less likely to have any effect.

Do we have a line item for that?

We would if we didn't want people numberslutting, Just like white-fonting.

ND, I think our rules say that everything needs to pass with a true majority (more than 50 percent of the votes, no preference exempted).

LJ are you sure about this? My spotty memory is saying the opposite, that the rules say a simple majority. And we've been doing yes/nos to avoid the problem.