alt account question [Solved]

[pagani123]

so is it against any of the ltt forum rules to have an alt account? I will primarily be using it for build logs. i would not be doing them under my regular user name because a friend of mine will be working with me on the builds so he would prefer we use it under the companies name that way he gets some credit.

thank

[TheRandomness]

Or just set your title as his name

c:

[flibberdipper]

Probably is. I know they don't like it when you make multiple accounts.

[thatguyyouknow75]

Alt accounts are against CoC

[QueenDemetria]

Alt accounts are against CoC

Actually the CoC is dead, and the new community standards mentions nothing about alternate accounts or evading bans.

[harrynowl]

AFAIK alt accounts are not permitted, but a lot of the people doing it are evading bans..

[Enderman]

yes, you are only allowed to have one account

[manikyath]

Actually the CoC is dead, and the new community standards mentions nothing about alternate accounts or evading bans.

i'm sure they're working on putting that back in.

[AresKrieger]

According to the new community standards there is no rule against it

 

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/965477-community-standards/

 

 

i'm sure they're working on putting that back in.

 

 

That would make sense to do so.

[Sauron]

PM a mod to be sure, but in this case I think there's no harm. You could just treat it as being your friend's account.

[pagani123]

Or just set your title as his name

c:

Probably is. I know they don't like it when you make multiple accounts.

Alt accounts are against CoC

Actually the CoC is dead, and the new community standards mentions nothing about alternate accounts or evading bans.

AFAIK alt accounts are not permitted, but a lot of the people doing it are evading bans..

yes, you are only allowed to have one account

 

PM a mod to be sure, but in this case I think there's no harm. You could just treat it as being your friend's account.

 

Ok i will just have him run that account then. i am the builder but hes the photographer and i guess he will be the pr guy

[QueenDemetria]

i'm sure they're working on putting that back in.

TBH they should add a lot of stuff back in.

[manikyath]

TBH they should add a lot of stuff back in.

i think they're porting it over into the new thread since the old one isnt "gone", its just hidden.

[alpenwasser]

Ok i will just have him run that account then. i am the builder but hes the photographer and i guess he will be the pr guy

 

Yeah that's fine. We're currently discussing about adding something about that to the Community Standards.

As a side note, regardless of that, obviously using a new account to evade a ban on an earlier account will lead to automatic perma. Otherwise we wouldn't have banned the first account to begin with. Just in case anyone was wondering.

 

TBH they should add a lot of stuff back in.

 

 

i think they're porting it over into the new thread since the old one isnt "gone", its just hidden.

While the new Community Standards are probably not yet in their final form, we're trying to keep them more compact than the CoC was. I mean, the CoC was starting to get ridiculously long. Even us mods sometimes had trouble finding stuff in there when doing moderating work:

"Hm, dammit, I know there's a rule about that somewhere in here, but where?!"

*furious scrolling and Ctrl-F'ing*

So we're going to try to keep the CS more compact. Among other things, we're going to rely more on common sense and guidelines than spelling out every last rule just for the pedants. But hey, once upon a time the CoC was compact-ish as well, so who knows, the CS might end up ballooning too.

[manikyath]

While the new Community Standards are probably not yet in their final form, we're trying to keep them more compact than the CoC was. I mean, the CoC was starting to get ridiculously long. Even us mods sometimes had trouble finding stuff in there when doing moderating work:

"Hm, dammit, I know there's a rule about that somewhere in here, but where?!"

*furious scrolling and Ctrl-F'ing*

So we're going to try to keep the CS more compact. Among other things, we're going to rely more on common sense and guidelines than spelling out every last rule just for the pedants. But hey, once upon a time the CoC was compact-ish as well, so who knows, the CS might end up ballooning too.

thats probably a good thing, i've read trough the old CoC countless times, and it was that much information on a small space that it seemed to be different every time i looked at it...

 

but yeah, loving the new CS so far. i know it should be redundant to say this, but you guys deserve it: good work, moderators and admins.

[pagani123]

 

Yeah that's fine. We're currently discussing about adding something about that to the Community Standards.

As a side note, regardless of that, obviously using a new account to evade a ban on an earlier account will lead to automatic perma. Otherwise we wouldn't have banned the first account to begin with. Just in case anyone was wondering.

 

 

 

While the new Community Standards are probably not yet in their final form, we're trying to keep them more compact than the CoC was. I mean, the CoC was starting to get ridiculously long. Even us mods sometimes had trouble finding stuff in there when doing moderating work:

"Hm, dammit, I know there's a rule about that somewhere in here, but where?!"

*furious scrolling and Ctrl-F'ing*

So we're going to try to keep the CS more compact. Among other things, we're going to rely more on common sense and guidelines than spelling out every last rule just for the pedants. But hey, once upon a time the CoC was compact-ish as well, so who knows, the CS might end up ballooning too.

alright thanks for clearing that up 

[DebatED Nothing]

we're going to rely more on common sense and guidelines than spelling out every last rule just for the pedants

Common sense is a lot less common than you'd think, this might give you some trouble based on my past experiences. I've seen people demand to know exactly what swear words were and weren't allowed on a forum with "no extreme swearing" as a rule...

[manikyath]

Common sense is a lot less common than you'd think, this might give you some trouble based on my past experiences. I've seen people demand to know exactly what swear words were and weren't allowed on a forum with "no extreme swearing" as a rule...

how about solving that with a spoiler explaining what we see as "common sense" that normal functioning people can skip over...

[DebatED Nothing]

how about solving that with a spoiler explaining what we see as "common sense" that normal functioning people can skip over...

Hehe. The problem is common sense in communicating with other people is particularly uncommon in the tech community, because generally we're not a very social group (and I'd say that there's a higher concentration of people with autism, which isn't bad really because they're incredibly good at facts an info, which is useful in tech).

[manikyath]

Hehe. The problem is common sense in communicating with other people is particularly uncommon in the tech community, because generally we're not a very social group (and I'd say that there's a higher concentration of people with autism, which isn't bad really because they're incredibly good at facts an info, which is useful in tech).

well, you're currently talking to someone with autism, that was following the old CoC before he even read it.

sometimes rules just make sense and you can follow them without even knowing the details.

 

to quote a belgian comedian about our local law book: (roughly translated)

our law book is massively complex and bloated with details. its impossible to follow line by line, because its not designed for that.

its merely a description how us belgians have decided we want to manage our piece of the world in a way that the majority can live a happy, satisfying life.

[alpenwasser]

Common sense is a lot less common than you'd think

 

Oh, we know, trust me.

 

how about solving that with a spoiler explaining what we see as "common sense" that normal functioning people can skip over...

Yeah, but let's be honest: Those people who'd actually need to read that section are probably the ones who are more likely to skip it.

Honestly though, the common sense approach actually works pretty well, for the most part. Considering we have 270,000-ish members, most of them don't really have any issues sticking to that (yes, I know that not all of those are active accounts, and only a minority are regularly active, but still). And those who cause problems, they'll cause problems whether our rules are broad or pedantic (for the most part at least), it won't really matter that much how specific our rules are (based on our experience with the pedantry in the old CoC).

I mean, it's not like we're going to permaban somebody about something which they couldn't have known or deduced. Nobody is going to have their account nuked because they misunderstood the Community Standards, it should be clear and comprehensive enough to prevent that I think.

As an example, let's take the swear words: Our general policy is:

• Directing insults at other users is an absolute No-Go. This should be well covered by the Community Standards ("Ensure a friendly atmosphere to our visitors and forum members.", "Don't be a dick", "Be excellent to each other")
• Otherwise, we usually leave it alone unless it gets excessive (and yes, obviously there's quite a bit of room for interpretation in that term). And even then, we're not going to go around with our ban hammer. Most of the time we'll just edit out a few profanities and leave a note in the post (personally I usually replace them with stuff like "flowers and sunshine", "kitties and puppies" or similar things, but that's not really official policy, just my personal touch), maybe we'll send a PM to the member, something like that. But nobody needs to be afraid of the ban hammer just because they throw the occasional "Fuck" into their posts (hell, I'd have been banned a long time ago if that were the case ).

Basically, the things for which we get out the ban hammer should be well covered even by the shortened Community Standards, and for the less serious cases you might get an edited post, a friendly PM or maybe the odd warning, but nothing too serious (I know that "warning" sounds serious, but honestly, often we use it mostly so that we can track a user's history and recognize a pattern of issues if there arises one, not necessarily because we're super pissed). And if you have questions, you can always contact us and ask for clarifications.

In the end, it's a compromise: Either we have a super long and specific set of rules which covers every possible eventuality, and nobody would read or understand it, or we have a shorter but more general set of guidelines, which hopefully more people will read, but which doesn't cover every possible scenario. They both have their upsides and drawbacks, but based on our experiences with the rather lengthy CoC, we've decided to give the short-and-sweet approach a try.

[manikyath]

 Yeah, but let's be honest: Those people who'd actually need to read that section are probably the ones who are more likely to skip it.

gosh, you're such flowers and sunshine

/s

 

the idea of having it there isnt as much as them reading it as it is a point of reference when you have the loud faces that claim you act like "the wild west" because you have all these "unwritten rules" etc.

that kind of person is why the belgian law book takes up half a warehouse worth of shelves, rather than just a little booklet.

[MG2R]

I know it should be redundant to say this, but you guys deserve it: good work, moderators and admins.

you're lucky there's nothing in the CS about trying to bribe the mods with flattery

[manikyath]

you're lucky there's nothing in the CS about trying to bribe the mods with flattery

not really trying to bribe, i just thought you guys could use a positive note after the sh*tstorm lately...

[alpenwasser]

gosh, you're such flowers and sunshine

/s

Oh, I'm a fountain of positivity!

 

the idea of having it there isnt as much as them reading it as it is a point of reference when you have the loud faces that claim you act like "the wild west" because you have all these "unwritten rules" etc.

that kind of person is why the belgian law book takes up half a warehouse worth of shelves, rather than just a little booklet.

Yeah, that was basically the idea behind the old CoC. We're well aware that practically nobody read that thing in its entirety, but we made it so detailed for the purpose of having a set of rules to reference in warnings. But eventually it just got too cumbersome to be of any actual use. So it will probably come down to us just explaining a bit more what somebody did wrong and how we would like them to behave in the future when we write a warning so that they have all the needed information not to run into trouble again.

I don't really think a perfect solution exists, but we've just reached the conclusion that the old approach wasn't really working anymore as we'd like it to, hence why we're trying something new. We shall see how it goes.