Info Please.....

[guest061212-1]

Originally Posted by broes

I thought the violation in linking old and new handles was in place for people that had to change their handles for reasons of personal security. I don't see how that rule would apply to a person that has been banned for life under one handle but still posts with another.

There are no rules- just guidelines.

And for as long as I have been around, only a handful of lifetime bans have lasted the lifetime of a board.

Sometimes, it behooves the management of Eccie to leave someone on so they can keep an eye on them. The same miscreants tend to often post a lot of tidbits of information about themselves, too.

[~Ze~]

Originally Posted by PODarkness

I've asked this question before, regarding this eccie policy. When it comes down to it, which way will eccie loyalties go? Protecting a possibly dangerous provider from her history, or allowing valuable information to be posted that could save a client from a potentially dangerous situation.

Loyalties noted.

POD

This issue goes both ways sadly. Since the beginning ECCIE has had a stance that "Everyone is given a clean slate.". Just so happens that providers who have done harm AND guys that have done just as much if not worse harms, are both covered under that blanket. I can point to at least 20 men that have new handles on here that IMO should not. They are dangerous and violent to providers, especially new ones.

The only thing the ladies can do is connect the information via back channels. and report sites. I wonder if it isn't time for the men to do something along those lines as well, seeing how ECCIE is going to stand strong on the second chance thing.

I just don't get how they have such strong policies about something like this, when clearly she is using the name (or someone posing as her) on other boards. BUT- if a provider wants to just fade into the darkness or retire, they won't help her have a NRP until her entire web presence is gone and don't offer to protect her working names until such. (some ladies see that "loyalties" thing from the other side)

I don't think the "loyalties" should be swayed either way towards providers or men. It should be more of an "ECCIE Membership" loyalties. We all contribute to our little world.

[administrator]

Hi Ze! Good points you have made. Allow me to clarify some things.

First of all, the 2nd chance thing. That was only at the inception of ECCIE. Our goal was not to block anyone at first, based on bad behaviors from previous boards. Points and bans from other boards did not carry over here. Everyone was given a chance to fit in within the ECCIE community at that time. This was meant to apply to rule-breakers and those who had gotten themselves excluded from other boards for disruptive behavior. They got a fresh start here. It did not apply to those who demonstrated violent behavior or who had proven themselves to be a danger to the community, although I know some who got a fresh start here were, in the opinion of some, quite dangerous. We worked through most of those in the first 6 months....and if anyone remains now, it's because they took advantage of the fresh start and changed their ways.

Now, with regard to connecting new handles to former handles.

Let me start by giving apologies on the behalf of me and my staff as a whole. Many of the edits on this thread were unnecessary.

Please understand that often times a staff member will receive a report or stumble on a thread and their first reaction is to go right to work enforcing the guidelines of this site. I'll be the first to admit that we don't always get it right each and every time. Especially when something appears to be potentially time-sensitive and might threaten the privacy and anonymity of one of our members. In those cases, we try to act fast.

The good thing is that staff discussions do take place on just about every situation, before and after the fact, and most if not all of my staff is very good about straightening things out if it was decided that the first course of action perhaps wasn't the best approach that could have been taken to address the situation.

Broes is exactly right. When a member approaches us with a security risk that they have encountered that makes necessary a name change on the board, then we, the staff, will do our best to protect the privacy of that member by trying to catch and put a stop to any instances in which someone publicly attempts to connect the new name with the old. Most of the time when this happens, it is totally innocent and done out of curiosity...however on occasion, members attempt to make the connection for nothing more than bad intentions. In either scenario, we will try to act fast to address the situation and protect the member's privacy as much we can.

On the other hand, if a member managed to get themselves banned here for, let's say, the reasons being discussed (violent, dangerous behavior that could potentially put our members in harms way) then we certainly do not assume any responsibility whatsoever to prevent connections made by our members. Sometimes, though, a staff member will react before knowing all of the details of the situation, or recalling past events. Let's cut them some slack when this happens. It's done with the right intentions and it's impossible for every staff member to be privy to every event and situation that has occurred throughout hobby land for the past several years. But fortunately, given the size of our community, and the depth of knowledge of our members, the right info comes out one way or the other, giving us the opportunity to right things in the event we made the wrong call up front.

In this particular situation, I'd say that making the members aware of the possible connection is of great importance, as it could keep our readers out of harm's way. Thanks to the members who went to the trouble to alert their fellow hobbyists of this risk, and again, sorry that it looks like we may have started down the wrong road before getting the facts together and allowing the flow of information to continue, unedited.

And on a final note, you all know that ECCIE staff is NOT "ban-happy" and it's a rare occasion that we issue a "long-term" suspension of privileges from this site. However, in those rare occasions that a ban of a year or more, or even permanent ban is the appropriate course of action, this does not mean that staff will attempt to protect the banned member should it be suspected by the membership that they have returned under a new handle.

If you suspect such a thing has taken place and you feel you can reasonably back up your claims, by all means bring it to the table for discussion. Honestly, we'd prefer that you bring it to staff privately and allow us to use our technical tools to attempt to make a determination, but should you feel so compelled to share your suspicions with your fellow members, by all means you may do so. I just ask that you do so in a respectful manner and avoid insulting remarks....we just don't like to see that in the public forums, no matter who it's directed toward.

Regarding the connection that was made by one or two members in this thread and maybe one or two others, you may discuss it, and if anyone has info that will help staff make a determination then feel free to pass that info along to us. I can tell you though, that in this case, there is nothing that our staff has found that can confirm the claims, so at the moment there is no action that can be taken until we have something more concrete. Interestingly, I do have a report that a particular member witnessed said banned member log in to the site using this new handle, but unfortunately this is coming through a third party and not the individual who witnessed this. I'd want to hear from him directly on this matter just to make sure I have all the details from the source. In any event, rest assured we are working on this, and taking it seriously. It's not being brushed under the carpet, and contrary to the beliefs of some, nobody's "protected" We simply have no intentions of allowing someone to circumvent a suspension by registering a new identity. We'll act on it if we can confirm it.

By the way, FYI Charli Knox is no longer an active member on this site, and any variations of Nicolette which do exist in the member list appear to be somebody completely different. Personally, I don't suspect there's much of a chance that this new Nicolette will attempt to register here. Yeah it could happen, but I doubt it.

That about sums it up. Carry on my friends, and thanks for taking the time to read this.

St. C

[DallasDude2012]

St. Chris- thanks for the clarifications, notes, and explanations on policies and your very short note.

I joined EECIE within days of it's start up and then had to leave after a while, for reasons I won't go into here. I still continued to read postings every day while UTR.

Needless to say, you and Fawn have done a great job with this web site, which in my opinion has easily surpassed all other webs sites that try to do the same thing.

THANK YOU to the both of you, and staff - for your excellence in managing things.

Keep up the good work!

[bigfishguy]

Y'all are funny... I love that you guys talk about the most complex woman on the planet... I love it its like entertaining... I am way to [Forbidden topic - Staff] alk ish to the haters but keep it cummin... I DO...

[bigfishguy]

we love y'all...

[Guest071613-2]

Originally Posted by bigfishguy

we love y'all...

Hi, Charli! So....you are so successful that you still check the hooker boards for your name? You would have made a bigger impact if you would have not said anything at all...this is lame.

[~Ze~]

Step one... post a ton of pics of "the new girl" in chat, with and without Charli.

Step two... tell everyone in the room you are the "helper".

Step three...Attachment 110083

Right after that hit step four... where you post a pic of you and what I am guessing to be your two sons in chat for the world to see...

Step five... get the ban hammer. (no children)

[SteveGoldstein]

..

[trynagetlaid]

Originally Posted by SteveGoldstein

..

Thanks Steve...

[*GoddessDallas*]

YOU ROCK, St. Christopher!