please nuke chefk and kevin606. they are clearly harrassing hunter boyce chandler: see their comments in http://www.soulcast.com/post/customer_service_post_new'>this post. if their behavior does not warrant banning at the user and IP level, nothing does. failure to nuke them will result in my losing every confidence in the administration of this site and its operations, and i know for a fact that i am not alone in that regard.
these fucks have harrassed a soulcaster, someone who was until not too long ago the single most popular user--and hence biggest eyeball draw here. both from a legal and pure business angle, you have to drop them.
that these 2 still have IDs on this site is quite frankly disgusting and contemptible.
ed
soulcast_help posted on Aug 25, 2006
| views: 997
Comments
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 26, 2006....
the user in question had the comments in question deleted. however, i'm fairly certain that the posts must still be housed on the servers.
ed
-
JadeLondon said on Aug 26, 2006....
332001 is back. He left a comment on my post. I thought he was banned, also.
-
GrapeKoolaid said on Aug 26, 2006....
It is indeed sad to believe that SoulCast is not discouraging this kind of behavior. Just because they're anonymous shouldn't mean they're immune to the law.
To steal someone's blog is a clear violation of terms of service in SC, is it not? So why not ban them at their first offense? Why does SoulCast need people that steal other peoples stuff? How is that going to benefit SC?
-
GMNIMan said on Aug 26, 2006....
Ed,
The link to the comments of the two spineless slugs doesn't work. It points to the Customer Service Post New instead.
You are right however, they should be banned at the IP level. However that will not stop them from going to a WiFi hotspot to continue their evil deeds, but it's a start. I have read that they are even sending HBC black roses. Had he made any police report regarding that?
GM
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 26, 2006....
sorry, gmniman: that should go to this post. thanks for heads up.
ed
-
hotaka said on Aug 26, 2006....
These two have gone beyond being nasty. They have actually sent black roses and a hateful message to HBC, who is in hospital now. As you can see by viewing the various blogs about hunter boyce chandler, the SoulCast community is seriously in an uproar about these two. We don't want their kind harrassing other SoulCasters to this extent.
-
GMNIMan said on Aug 26, 2006....
Okay, I went there, but I think HBC has already nuked them! SC must really do something about those juvenile delinquents.
-
paidinblood said on Aug 26, 2006....
332001 is back? could you leave a link please?
I personally think that police protection is in order.
-
paidinblood said on Aug 26, 2006....
Oh yeah, SC should get rid of them too.
-
schreist said on Aug 26, 2006....
7. Code of Conduct
Just adding my 2c
-
Zayda said on Aug 26, 2006....
Please find a way to rid our community here at SC of these two users who are harrassing HBC both on here and now in his real life.
-
happykat said on Aug 26, 2006....
SC administrators, do what you can, please.
Don't take the words of people posting here as gospel.
Investigate it yourself and take the appropriate action.
-
CreativeWoman said on Aug 26, 2006....
They are blocked to commenting on my blog. However, I left their handywork on my post "Can I Pick Your Brain About An Email Problem" in case anyone would like to see. (Hint, Hint, Soul Cast Powers that be.) Their comments were tame compaired to the harrassment they have inflicted on others.
CW
-
Mamie said on Aug 26, 2006....
soulcast: pls eliminate the idiots, it puts a damper on this great community,
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 27, 2006....
thanks, all.
ed
-
SoulCast said on Aug 28, 2006....
Hello everyone,
This issue is not such an easy one to deal with technically. First, we do not track IP addresses as our annonymity promise states which means we do not have their IP addresses. Second, even if we did it would be completely useless to block an IP address. The vast majority of home internet services use dynamic IP addresses so even if we blocked their IP's they would have new ones by simply restarting their modem. It would do no good. They could also go to the library and post or use an anonymizer which hides their IP address. Basically, blocking their IP will do no good.
Given that we can't block them from the site it would do no good to delete their accounts because there is nothing stopping them from creating new ones and the more attention they get may only instigate them. The best thing to do is to block them from posting on your blogs, ignore them, and let us know if they post anything in their blogs that cross the line. So far everytime we've looked the offending material is already gone.
The most important thing is to keep your private/personal information private. We have deleted the reposting of hbc's personal info which he deleted from his blog and wel will continue to do this as necessary.
We wish we could do more to resolve this situation, but the nature of the internet and the anonymity provided by our site prevents us from doing much.
- The Soulcast Team
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
i'm nowhere near convinced that the user in question is anywhere near that sophisticated but i for one appreciate your letting us know. and i appreciate that the very concept of how the site works is at issue here. thanks.
ed
-
carmachu said on Aug 29, 2006....
So what your saying is, is that I can be as big an asshole as I want, and there really isnt anything you can do about it?
Thats not very encouraging.
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
i have had more time to consider the information and am drafting a response.
ed
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
while i was initially mollified by this response, my thinking has evolved on the matter.
i believe this response is not satisfactory, for one reason: these IDs were still in violation of section 7 of the terms of use. either they were or they were not. even if the comments were deleted, i am quite certain the comments are not "hard" deleted but rather merely not linked to the blog record in the database.
if the terms of use require that users not harrass one another, then the evidence is here, was witnessed, by literally scores of other users.
so maybe the offending user (one user, 2 IDs) creates a new ID. and if his behavior continues, the new account should be deleted. and so on. and so on. but you are essentially shrugging your shoulders and pissing on your own terms of use.
i find this disappointing in the extreme. and i suspect i am hardly alone in that regard.
ed
-
bloc said on Aug 29, 2006....
@carmachu
"So what your saying is, is that I can be as big an asshole as I want, and there really isnt anything you can do about it?"
Welcome to the internet. Seriously, this is what the internet is. It's like all those people that are assholes when driving, but wouldn't do it to your face. The same is true on the interenet and there isn't anything you or I or soulcast can do about it. You either have an open community or you don't.
@silverwhisper
what it seems your asking is that soulcast spend many hours, and dollars, deleting accounts that only take 30 seconds to create and a minute or two to post on. They can't stop the people from making new accounts so your asking them to spend time and money that has no benefit to it.
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
bloc: no, i'm asking that they enforce the terms of use. these terms are established as a requirement for using the service provided. other websites will revoke accounts for users who violate their terms of use. this should be a fairly routine process.
ed
-
bloc said on Aug 29, 2006....
but i don't think it is routine. They have to take the time to determine if an account is in violation, then do whatever they do to delete it. That takes far longer than the time it takes someone to make a new account. Now imagine once the site grows even more and there are hundreds of trolls on the site. It would cost them a fortune to do what your asking. Ideally I'd love for these people to get removed from teh site. I just don't see a practical way to do it.
I personally came to this site because of the anonymity thing and I wouldn't want them to change that just to deal with some immature idiots.
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
bloc, i believe you're making assumptions about the scope of the work associated w/ this. as i said: i've seen it happen at other sites i frequent. posts, comments and any sign of that person's existence simply go away. i'm not sure how it's set up here, but i can't imagine that it's set up in a way as to make that process anything but easy. it's possible that you're right and i'm wrong but until someone posting under the soulcast ID says one way or the other--and frankly, i would understand them not wanting to address the matter at all--we won't really know.
i happen to like the anonymity as well and i wouldn't want that threatened.
ed
-
carmachu said on Aug 29, 2006....
No bloc, thats NOT what the internet is.Its not all assholes, there are many many GOOD folks.
What silver has asked, is that they enforce terms of service. Soulcast has their RL information and a chat on the phone might cure that, especially if said assholes are minors....(not that I know).
There is plenty soulcast could do. They've chosen not to. They've chosen to have a terms of serivce thats worthless, and has just paper value only.
Either you have rules that you enforce, or you dont. Its their choice. Personally knowing that they cant be bothered is a bit worrysome. THey want the benefits of a community, but not the responsibility.
-
bloc said on Aug 29, 2006....
carmachu
soulcast has absolutely no RL information. You read the terms of service so closely yet completely missed the stuff about anonymity! They have absolutely no RL info on anyone.
you also missed my point about the internet. The internet is like the wild west where people hide behind the fact that they are essentially anonymous and there are no consequences. So you reply to your earlier point, YES, on the internet you CAN be as big of an asshole as you want and there isn't really anything that anyone can do about it unless you run afoul of the government. Short of that you can big as big of an asshole as you want. welcome to the internet.
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
bloc: please don't make the mistake of assuming that carmachu is ignorant as to what online interactions can be like. he's actually quite practiced at this, as am i.
and speaking of having missed points: if you offer a service based upon certain terms, the service should be retracted if the terms are not honored. that's really the problem here, you see.
ed
-
bloc said on Aug 29, 2006....
i understand your point, but all the offending material is gone right? deleting their accounts will do nothing, they will make new ones. It seems to me that if the offending material is gone then the policy is enforced well enough for me to be content. Soulcast did delete the post where they reposted hbc's info.
I don't see what else they could do that would have any effect whatsoever.
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
[sigh]
with a single, solitary exception, it wasn't any action of soulcast that removed the offending material: it was individual soulcasters taking that action themselves.
so he (not they: it's just one person) creates new user IDs. and if the user IDs are reported for objectionable behavior, those get blown away, too. lather, rinse and repeat.
at some point, the idiot will find other places to be an asshole.
all links obtained through googling.
disclaimer: no trolls were harmed in the making of this comment.
ed
-
SoulCast said on Aug 29, 2006....
Hi ed,
Bloc actually hit the nail on the head. We care deeply about the feelings of our users, but in this circumstance it would take more time for us to delete their accounts than it would for them to make new ones. We can't delete an account because you or any other member says so. We have to see the offending material and we haven't. Yes we could dig through the databse and find it, but that takes time, a lot more time than it would take them to create another account.
We allow users to delete comments from their blogs for this very reason. We want each user to decide what is acceptable on their blog and that system appears to be working in this case.
- Soulcast Admin
-
silverwhisper said on Aug 29, 2006....
please understand that i wasn't saying that you don't care: i get that. i've worked w/ databases before, i understand that there's millions of records in the tables, the vast majority of which we as users will never see. i similarly understand that you cannot go on any given user's say-so.
that said: so if the desired outcome then is revocation of an offensive user's account, we are actually best served by pointing the comment/post in question to soulcast_help and taking no other action whatsoever?
surely you can see that this is somewhat problematic?
ed
-
no_nom said on Oct 26, 2006....
There is way to block someone from post in soulcast.com.
Every IP provide a set of specific ID. Instead of tracking IP address, SC could set a level higher to trace it's IP's ID. Thus, never mind how many times a person resets his dynamic IP address, the ID assigned to his account will never be changed. If he contacts his provider to have it changes, his activities will be automatically trigger acct record viewing. Soulcast could also easily contact the provider to file a complain on any illicit activities that against the law, such as suspicious pedophile or would be killer. It's all about responsibility to help keep the internet clean and discourage those lawlessness dude from committed crime before hand. SC still able to keep it's privacy policy as long as never reveal or sell the info to any other corporations without user consent. These only protect SC corporate accountability and trustworthy with a seal and prevent of trouble in the future.
If SC programmer don't understand what I mean, he could simply try access Mozilla ChatZilla, sign in any server with nick then trace with whois. Or contact Yahoo n Google, they probably willing to share the coding technique to make SC server process such task.
Just my 2 cents opinion.
-
bloc said on Oct 26, 2006....
I think you are referring to mac addresses (I didn't take the time to look at chatzilla). Your missing the point though. Soulcast has a policy of not tracking users identities via IP or anything else. Doing this wouldn't be consistent with that policy.
Comment on "2 users in violation of the terms of use"
Related Posts: