Is this a rule???

[flinde]

I recently read this thread.

http://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=32623

The last two of the four posts both describe a rule against mentioning a members previous handle.

I went and read the rules that I could find, all 34 of them. Sadly, while doing so, I saw that quacking is against the rules or "strongly discouraged". Boo. I like quacking. But I digress.

Back on point. I didn't see any prohibition against mentioning a member's previous handle in the 34 rules. Did I miss it in the rules?

If its prohibited, fine, except maybe for those couple of providers (well, maybe just 1) that change their handles more often than I change my underwear, for no discernable reason. Its nice to be able to keep track of them.

If its not against any of the rules, I wanted to point this thread out. I dont want to see any rules of little or no value from dead and buried boards migrating here by osmosis. That could be a bad thing.

Owners, admins, is it against the rules to mention member's previous handle?

[chipper]

I just read the Guidelines too and didn't see it either. It is assumed , though, that the Ladies change their handles for a reason like stalking, family finding out or other reasons. It is considered bad form to mention the old handle to protect the Lady. If you know of a very good reason to call attention to the old handle I would take it to the staff.

I do not know of any Lady that has changed her handle for no discernable reason but it is possible.

Chipper

[flinde]

I agree, in a stalking situation, best to not discuss much. That's common sense.

My concern here though is people who may have moderated other boards, and belonged to other boards. Pointing out, trying to "enforce" rules that dont exist here. That could and would be a very slippery slope that could cause all kinds of potential problems.

Which is why i read those 34 rules, and posted this. Thanks for your response, chipper.

[Mokoa]

Do you know why the lady you are referring to changed her handle? Perhaps there was a very valid reason for it.

Unless you know with absolute certainty that the change of handle was not for security or privacy would it not be better to err on the side of caution and not possibly jeopardize her situation?

That certainly makes common sense.

[pyramider]

I tried to read the rules but since there were no pictures . . .

[Guest083013]

chipper - you folks have people (male and female) coming onto the board from previous places and also this very board with different personnas. Many of us know these people personally because we live and play within the same geographical settings.

There are at least three scenarios in the San Antonio forums alone where Providers have been "outed" to their previous handles. Two of those were very blatant, in fact - one outing AFTER an Administrator had already edited within the same thread. Stalking has NOT been the issue in either case; however, suits involving custody proceedings most certainly were. These are posted on open forums and not even in your more private areas. I'm sure if the young lady that flinde is referring to chooses to allow this forum to know her previous personal history within the hobby world - she would.

For the record - it was not I who quoted any rule. I agreed with the intent of a post. Way too many people want to get into the very personal real world of way too many people. This is a forum for sharing information about the hobby --- and I feel it should not be a place to share the oft times "darker side" of this world. And flinde - might I offer and suggest I would hope the eccie staff does NOT change handles for anyone Male or Female - without due cause and proper verification as to reasons for same.

And no Mossman broke no rules flinde - so please do not go there.

Common sense would tell you that some things are just more personal than others.

flinde your potshot; albeit, "My concern here though is people who may have moderated other boards, and belonged to other boards." is unwarranted, unwelcomed, childish, noted and will not be forgotten. Many of us (including staff on this forum) are from "other" boards and that is our choice. Truth be known - MOST are from other forums and I recognize many. Some chose to come here and assist the owners in allowing this forums to flourish - while others chose to go other forums and do the same thing or to simply sit back and watch. As a matter of fact - there are some who hold dual citzenship which indeed is a kudo to them and mush more than I would want.

Safety and concern for everyone has got to be paramount.

[Mokoa]

flinde wrote:
If its prohibited, fine, except maybe for those couple of providers (well, maybe just 1) that change their handles more often than I change my underwear, for no discernable reason. Its nice to be able to keep track of them.

flinde wrote:
If its not against any of the rules, I wanted to point this thread out. I dont want to see any rules of little or no value from dead and buried boards migrating here by osmosis. That could be a bad thing.

Little or no value? Are you freakin' kidding me?

I believe that any rule that is established to protect the security and privacy of a member (both ladies as well as the gents) is of great value and absolutely trumps any inconvenience it may cause you in, as you say, keeping track of their handles.

The privacy and security of any member must be respected. If that member want to reveal such information it should be their decision, not yours or anybody else's.

[guest011413-2]

Thank you Dennis and Mokoa. There is ALWAYS a valid reason to change a provider's handle.

Stalking, SO's calling us and being threatening, ect.

I have changed mine once and CK and D were on MY side bc of the situation. I'm 5'7, 128Lbs, and very willing to use my self defense methods. Buuuut when a provider changes their handle, it's for a legit reason...YES, some try to "escape" bad reviews. Others, try to "escape" trouble and bad ppl.

NEVER out a Lady in a public forum. It's for OUR safety. Don't put us in a vulnerable situation. We are here to please and give you some TLC...no harm in that.

ps: osmosis is fluid passing through a semi-permeable membrane. We as providers are not "solvents" and Amber (aspd) is still HERE. In all of our hearts. Just bc the board got "shut down" doesn't mean it's "dead"...we came here on ECCIE to do OUR job and make YOU happy. Let's not bash each other and make this place a place YOU wanna log into everyday.
There are plenty of boards, (which I also adv on...I'm here b/c I chose to be here...as so are it's members) It's informative...can be kind and the ladies are beautiful. <3

Regards,

Maribel

[SofaKingFun]

I suggest that everybody read the rules again. No particular reason, I just wanted to see if you'd follow my suggestion and read through them all again. Heh.

This knife cuts both ways. Sometimes members should know the history of who's behind a new handle. Sometimes not. The sad part of all of this is there's often a valid reason for the handle change; namely a safety/stalker issue; so this topic is almost like tip-toeing through a minefield.

Taking what Mokoa mentioned,

I believe that any rule that is established to protect the security and privacy of a member (both ladies as well as the gents) is of great value and absolutely trumps any inconvenience it may cause you in, as you say, keeping track of their handles.

The privacy and security of any member must be respected. If that member want to reveal such information it should be their decision, not yours or anybody else's.

I'd like to introduce this little scenario.

Say there's a gal owning/operating an agency and she outs a client and is subsequently banned from a board as a result. Now lets say that almost immediately after managing to get herself banned, she (conveniently) happened to "sell" this agency to some guy...let's call him "new-handle Paul". New-handle Paul in turn registers on the same board using "his" new agency's name/handle, claiming that he knows very little about running/managing an agency, etc. HOWEVER, "he" is still using the exact same e-mail address belonging to the former owner of the now banned former-owner's agency.
(keep in mind, this is supposedly a "new" business entity)

Should this be cause for concern to unsuspecting hobbyists? Forget the fact that "new-handle Paul" knows little to nothing about running an agency, and forget the fact that "new-handle Paul" posts in exactly the same manner and fashion as the former, now-banned, owner; but just the fact that any unsuspecting hobbyist who sends their personal and private information to this "new agency" runs the risk of having that information intercepted by the former owner...it's HER freaking e-mail address and she was banned for outing a member.

But going from Mokoa's statement, are you suggesting that this information and more importantly, her former handle should NOT be mentioned/discussed in the vein/time as "new-handle Paul"?

Keep in mind, "new-handle Paul" and the "member who was outed" are BOTH members here but anyone with just a lick of sense knows what's going on
( http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=29838 ).

So again, going strictly off of the argument above, who's really being protected by not allowing this former and surprisingly "new" handle to be brought forth and addressed publicly?

Whose privacy and security is being most compromised in such a situation?

Most importantly, I wouldn't call this an "inconvenience", I'd call it a legitimate risk. Should this not be allowed for discussion?

Like I said, the knife cuts both ways. There are certainly very valid, honest, and legitimate reasons behind some of the handle changes. I get that.

By the same token, there are also some very bogus reasons for someone to change their handle.

I guess what I'm getting at is there's no hard answer to the question because to enact a rule either allowing it or not allowing it can very easily place a lot of members in some real and serious jeopardy.

Best to err on the side of caution though...

.

[dirty diana]

i think it's far more important to keep the ladies who change handles due to custody/spiteful so's/outting safe than it is to 'keep up' with those who get banned for various reasons. if there is a rule in place that does both, then it should not be altered just so you can keep up with the crazies. the safety of the ladies trumps being 'in the know' of the drama circle imho

i also think it is on you if you want to send your personal info to an agency/indy/anyone who wants you to give that kind of info. it's a risk YOU take and providers with legitimate reasons to change handles (safety reasons) should not have to suffer because YOU didn't do enough research or let your personal info fall into the wrong hands.

[GneissGuy]

Multiple handles aren't allowed. So when a person's handle changes, the staff had to approve, or the member broke the rules.

Maybe this should be added to the rules.

Rule 18 says:

#18 - Multiple handles are not permitted, unless in certain circumstances are expressly approved by staff in advance on a case-by-case basis. Action will be taken in cases where staff finds multiple handles are being used for deceptive reasons, to carry out an agenda (promotion or trashing of another), or to return to the board following a previous suspension or ban.

Why not add:

If you ever had a user ID on this board and it was deleted or disabled for any reason, you must inform the staff before registering for a new ID. If you wish to change your ID, ask the staff. Tell them if you need the change due to security/safety/privacy problems. The staff will decide whether to allow the new/changed ID and whether the ID change will be secret. Unless the change was publicly announced by the user or the staff, other members should not mention a user's handle change.

Sometimes people change ID's due to stalkers, outing, suspicious real world acquaintances, etc. Sometimes they realized they shouldn't have used the same handle as a real world bulleting board, their real name, etc. Sometimes they want to change ID's due to getting a bad reputation under the old handle. Sometimes they just decide they like a new name. Sometimes, they want to change something in their name like "Galleria_Amy" because she isn't in the Galleria any more.

Each case needs to be handled differently. Sometimes you just change it. Sometimes, you need to "guest" the old account and create a new one from scratch. Sometimes you need to be sure that no one mentions old handle vs. new handle.

[flinde]

dennisrn

I completely agree with you re legit reasons for changing ID's, situations where outing (revealing a previous ID) would be bad news. But that is absolutely not what this is about.

My concerns are rules and ways of doing things which may have existed on other boards, good or bad policies, finding their way here, through some process of osmosis, rather than rule adoption.

Mossman violated no rule. Outed no one. Yet finds himself admonished for violating some non-existent rule (by two members no less), and, worse yet, Mossman apologises for his "transgression".

That is simply not right. In fact, its sort of bullying.

A simple "Mossman, sometimes there are handle changes, and UTR providers for a variety of good reasons such as criminal, family law matters. Please respect that" would be absolutely appropriate in the right situation. Mossman, anyone would act with discretion in such a situation. This is a hobby of discretion.

But that's not what happened. Mossman was smacked down, by two members for violating some (apparently non-existent) rule.

We old timers have all come from other boards. None were perfect (except for the redsnake delphi--that was a perfect board). I think that both your and my sensitivity in this situation probably arise from some of the same policies on the same no longer active board.

Understand that it is out of utmost respect for our hobby, this board, providers and hobbiests that I felt compelled to say what I did here. Nothing would make me happier than to have the opinions and contributions of all accepted here, that no one ever feel intimidated or bullied here, and the privacy of all and dignity of all be respected here.

People being bullied, then apologizing, when they have done nothing wrong, is not a good thing. I hope it never happens again here.

If you feel that what I said was some sort of personal slight, it was not, and was never intended to be. I hope that you can accept this, and that we can go forward as amiable fellow board members.

[Guest083013]

post #6 above

And no Mossman broke no rules flinde - so please do not go there.

Common sense would tell you that some things are just more personal than others.

absolutely nothing else to share with you on this subject and I shan't!!

Have a great weekend.

[Mokoa]

write:
That is simply not right. In fact, its sort of bullying.

A simple "Mossman, sometimes there are handle changes, and UTR providers for a variety of good reasons such as criminal, family law matters. Please respect that" would be absolutely appropriate in the right situation. Mossman, anyone would act with discretion in such a situation. This is a hobby of discretion.

But that's not what happened. Mossman was smacked down, by two members for violating some (apparently non-existent) rule.

What I posted was the following...

Originally Posted by Mokoa

Please remember that previous handles may not be mentioned here.

However, I can tell you that she is well worth a visit.

OK, I probably should have worded that post a little differently so it would have been clear that I was not referencing an ECCIE rule. For example, saying should not instead of may not.

However, let me ask you something...

Please explain to me how my post was, as you say, smacking him down. How was my post, as you say, bullying?

You depiction of my post is misleading at best and an outright lie at worst.

Such deception will not help your credibility here.

[flinde]

Mokoa

Well then, we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this. Mossman certainly read your post the same way I did, - he apologized for his "rule violation"!

The tone and tenor of Mossman's admonishment caught my attention.

Smackdowns citing non existent rules dont belong here. Smackdowns don't belong here--not if this board strives to be the best it can be.

I'm done with this. Have a great day.