Scrap, get your arse over here!

[Scrapheap]

Just spent some time checking the sockpuppet alert group. My recollection is correct. You created your account yourself. The same is true for a majority of the socks--they were created by members who were admins at the time

This is just another bullshit lie from odeon.

I had my sock account LONG before I was an admin.

My sock was approved by site management.

I didn't "get around a sock ban", there was no prohibition on socks at the time.

My account was grandfathered in, it's not my fault those other socks didn't chose to post past a certain date.

[odeon]

Just spent some time checking the sockpuppet alert group. My recollection is correct. You created your account yourself. The same is true for a majority of the socks--they were created by members who were admins at the time

This is just another bullshit lie from odeon.

I had my sock account LONG before I was an admin.

My sock was approved by site management.

I didn't "get around a sock ban", there was no prohibition on socks at the time.

My account was grandfathered in, it's not my fault those other socks didn't chose to post past a certain date.

Your account was created when you were an admin. Go check.

[odeon]

It looks bad for you.  He claimed that he was grandfathered in, which you didn't answer.
And that the only reason he lost it now is that you were but hurt by something else he did recently.  Basically he is claiming that you are punishing him, a grown man, because he hurt your feelings.
All you said in response was a casual, no, not butt hurt.
But he evidence doesn't add up. I think he has a point.  Why did he lose his suck puppet now, after all these years....especially if (as you claim) he only used it now as he had the entire time he had it.
Why now?

Because I got fed up cleaning up after the troll. I've said this a number of times. You can choose to believe it, you can choose to say I'm lying. If the latter, you'd better back up your words.

I've also said, more than once, that yes, his sock is known, it's the only one being used. Incidentally, it's only used for trolling, something that Scrap could easily do with his usual account, just as anyone else. He'd be no more incognito with the sock other than with n00bs or relative n00bs, though. Anyway, grandfathered in is sort of wrong, tolerated is more right. Until that last troll, that is. The fact is that we've not allowed any new socks to register for a long time, and the fact is that his was the only one active after March 2008 that I know of.

And no, I didn't ban it because of some imagined previous butthurt. No idea what he is referring to, tbh. If anything, before this I thought we might be civil to each other. So no; no butthurt. If you think I'm lying, back it up, mate, instead of producing vague insinuations. I know you do a lot of those and you are very good at them, but unless you have proof perhaps you'd better leave it be and admit that you don't have proof.

[odeon]

Punishing a member because the admin is butt hurt is poor site policy...IMHO.

Again, either back it up or admit that you don't have proof.

[odeon]

Sure.  It still doesn't answer the questions:
Was scrap given the opportunity to cease and desist?
If not, why now?

Until those two are clarified then the 'you mad brah'  claim is valid.

Tell me why I should have. If he wants to troll, one account should be enough. Tell me why he is special. He could have trolled all he wanted with the account he uses. He chose to use the sock. Did you ask yourself why?

No butthurt involved. Again, if you think otherwise, back up your words.

[odeon]

And still:
As a long term member was scrap asked to stop?

What difference does that make? Should we have different rules for n00bs? You know perfectly well--at least if you choose to believe me or parts--that we haven't allowed new socks to register for a long time so I fail to see what point you are trying to make, if any. Or is it just for more drama?

[McGiver]

Not sure if I need to back up my words.  All I said is that it looked bad.  And you were dismissive. Due to the timing.

You stated above that you don't think it is necessary to ask a long term member about changes you make (unilaterally) on how they utilize intensity. 
Still the question remains: why now?

Also a new question arises:  you stated that sock puppets are not allowed.  For the sake of simplicity I'll assume this was debated and agreed apron by the majority.
Yet you are adamant that scrap made the sock puppet account when he was administrator (ihave no clue, these are your words.
The question....are administrators immune from the same rules as regular members?
If not, then why didn't you advise him at that time?

1.  Why now?
2.  Are admins not held to the same set of rules as regular members?

[McGiver]

Since you stated each time...back up my words....it is clear that I should address this.

I will once freedom here is legitimate.  If you are making spur of he moment decisions about how long term members utilize heir experience here, without insulting with them first, I am forced to believe that my words really don't matter. 

Really, I have no investment in this matter.  As a matter if fact, scrap told me that it will do no good since you always rationalize your positions and never admit hat perhaps things could have been handled differently.

[odeon]

Not sure if I need to back up my words.  All I said is that it looked bad.  And you were dismissive. Due to the timing.

I told you were good at insinuation.

You stated above that you don't think it is necessary to ask a long term member about changes you make (unilaterally) on how they utilize intensity. 
Still the question remains: why now?

I answered you why. If you think I'm lying, back up your words.

Also a new question arises:  you stated that sock puppets are not allowed.  For the sake of simplicity I'll assume this was debated and agreed apron by the majority.

I said that new socks haven't been allowed for a long time. Not the same thing, really, is it? For the sake of simplicity, I'll simply point out that this has not been a democracy since Calandale, Scrap and others trashed the experiment. Remember that, McJ?

Yet you are adamant that scrap made the sock puppet account when he was administrator (ihave no clue, these are your words.

Have a look, then. You won't need admin powers to find out.

The question....are administrators immune from the same rules as regular members?

?

If not, then why didn't you advise him at that time?

1.  Why now?

I have said why, repeatedly. Did you miss my every reply or do you just ignore them?

2.  Are admins not held to the same set of rules as regular members?

I don't understand this comment. Please explain.

[odeon]

Since you stated each time...back up my words....it is clear that I should address this.

I will once freedom here is legitimate.  If you are making spur of he moment decisions about how long term members utilize heir experience here, without insulting with them first, I am forced to believe that my words really don't matter. 

Really, I have no investment in this matter.  As a matter if fact, scrap told me that it will do no good since you always rationalize your positions and never admit hat perhaps things could have been handled differently.

Neat. Is me "rationalising my position" all that is stopping you (or him) now? What you are saying is that I don't have the same right to a callout than does everyone else. I was the one to call him out, not the other way around.

Again, if you think I did what I did out of butthurt rather than why I said I did, back up your words, don't hide behind irrelevance.

[odeon]

And yes, McJ, you do need to back up your words now. Claim something, back it up. Don't move the goalposts.

[McGiver]

Yes, I remember you blaming others when you made a power grab.  It's human nature.  Pretty much how I thought it would have played out.

What isn't clear about you allowing scrap to make a sock when he was an admin.  Why didn't you address this at that time. Why now?

Because of he timing and scraps assertion that you only banned it now as a result of a recent butt hurt.  Leaves one to wonder. Why now?

However, since you lumped scrap above in your excuse for lack of a democratic process I am led to believe that this wasnt a result of a recent butt hurt, you have an ongoing grudge against him.
Maybe it's time to let go?

No. You hadn't directly answered the question why now?  Why now when you knew he created it when he was an admin?

And do you allow admins to bend the rules? Is that standard practice now?

[McGiver]

And yes, McJ, you do need to back up your words now. Claim something, back it up. Don't move the goalposts.

you don't need to ask scrap to cease and desist because you don't like him?
I'm somewhat appalled that you didn't, but hey I guess that's your prerogative.

[odeon]

And yes, McJ, you do need to back up your words now. Claim something, back it up. Don't move the goalposts.

you don't need to ask scrap to cease and desist because you don't like him?
I'm somewhat appalled that you didn't, but hey I guess that's your prerogative.

Where does it say I don't ljke him and why would it matter? I asked him to back up his words and he hasn't. I ask you now and you haven't.

[Al Swearegen]

Really, I have no investment in this matter.  As a matter if fact, scrap told me that it will do no good since you always rationalize your positions and never admit hat perhaps things could have been handled differently.

OK, my views...

Actually, I see that you already know what they are so I don't see the point of repeating them. Thanks for listening--it's clear you did, and I hope I've managed to listen to your arguments as well.

I do apologise for implying that your views were about Richard specifically. Clearly they are not, and you have perfectly valid points. There's a lot to think about. Were Duke to flood the board again, I would probably act differently but I would still stop him because I think the issue of a member being allowed to restrict the freedoms of others is an important one.

Are you sure? Is this a lie from Scrap? Did you question whether he is telling you the truth or did you assume because Odeon is an Admin that he is a bad and corrupt Admin, and that if Scrap is not, then he must be a victim?