Urstinkenface...taking it to a new level.

[SomeRandomDude]

If you'd read the rest of the thing, we're trying to keep from ticking him off so he won't hack us.

[lem0nhead]

Riiiiight, so youre being held to ransom by a muppet who is peeing us off? Thats bad man. Wheres the folding arms shaking head smilie when you need it.

[sickofpalantirs]

maybe cause he was a contributing member at CC....so if I login as lem0nhead and hit the send new password I should be banned? he wasn't hacking...

[lem0nhead]

A contributing member of CC? So? If he was the king of spain would it be ok for him to tool around with peoples accounts? If anyone apart from me logs in as lem0nhead they deserve banning as it aint there account. Get real dude you cant justify him arseing about.

[DáinIronfoot]

I'm more inclined to agree with lem0n. I don't care what his reasoning is for logging in as someone else. Trying to access the accounts of other people who have not given permission for him to do so is not just harmless fun. It's against the most basic of rules, ones that don't NEED to be written.

That being said, I am going to write them anyway. Before USF's ban ends on Thursday (maybe Friday, depends on how these SMF forums handle it), I am going to write up some basic but very clear rules on what does and does not constitute banning, and for how long. I didn't want to have to do it at all, but I think it would be prudent now. That way there will be ambiguity. You break the rules, you suffer the clear-cut consequences. I don't want to turn this place into a Nazi death camp with everyone feeling like they're being watched and like they can't open up and have a good time, but there has to be SOMETHING basic in writing to keep this kind of nonsense from happening again.

I'll run them by you all first, though. So keep an eye on this forum the next couple days.

[lem0nhead]

I don't want to turn this place into a Nazi death camp with everyone feeling like they're being watched and like they can't open up and have a good time, but there has to be SOMETHING basic in writing to keep this kind of nonsense from happening again.
.

Dont worry dude ur not. The very fact these "rules" have to be drawn up highlights the point the guy is a muppet and needs sorting out as weve never needed infringement guidelines before.

[SomeRandomDude]

lem0n, consider what you're saying.

1). We let him stay. He keeps his account, doesn't mess around with stuff. He's YSF still, unfortunately, but heavy moderation should keep him in line (actually, since he joined, I think my question about all mods having jurisdiction over the Council of Cobra it more legit).
2). We ban him. He breaks into your account and starts randomly deleting stuff in the DC forum as well as posting as you.

[FM]

That happens, dude, I'm all for collectivelly sueing him. I mean, it IS the US after all, your legal system works WONDERS in such cases, no matter what his age is. Sop and bto know who he is, so it's rather easy to get the necessary data on him should we need to. Would teach him one #$&*@! of a lesson.

[SomeRandomDude]

Better yet, hire a professional assassin, give him free tickets to a third-world country and then bribe the judge! Much more efficient than a lengthy trial.

Or we could demand he settle out of court, using a state without the British Rule and hang all the attorney's fees he won't have to pay. Booyah.

[Kralik]

2). We ban him. He breaks into your account and starts randomly deleting stuff in the DC forum as well as posting as you.

NB, right now USF's ban disallows any forum access. He can't access the index, the login page, any posts... etc. From looking at the SMF source code it barfs any banned IP's out of the system before taking any action. Shouldn't be possible to hack (at least in theory ).

I'm all for letting the ban expire and then giving a 2nd chance, but with appropriate warnings.

[SomeRandomDude]

I'm on a library computer right now. No biggie. I also happen to have a connection which switches IPs and a computer with wireless that I connect to any wireless network with, oh, BTW, I have about 12 friends with computers...

Get the point?

[Kralik]

True enough. However, if the forums are not safe from the likes of USF, than they aren't safe from the rest of the world. There are worse things that could be done than mess with user accounts if SMF has a security hole. USF doesn't pose a bigger threat than anyone else out there. SoP admitted that his security question was too easy (it really was), and USF knows him, so I think that the "hacking" that occurred was merely clever guessing.

...Still! He's back on when his ban expires. What more could he ask for?

[sickofpalantirs]

precisely, he didn't hack...he just wanted to see the mod forum to see if you guys were talking about him hitting the reset button

plus now that he knows that DI is inspiring to be part of the CIA or NSA he's kinda scared...

[DáinIronfoot]

Yes, point taken, NB. If he's truly determined to cause trouble, then he can. But that's why we have such reliable mods and admins to make sure it doesn't go on any longer than necessary, right?

But we shouldn't reward him for it, or back down from our promised ban lengths. He's banned until late this week, and then he has a chance to prove he's learned to behave himself. If he hasn't, then I, for one, do not think letting the fact that banning might make him mad and try to lash out keep us from doing what's right by the REST of the forumers that are NOT causing trouble and that we, as good administrators and moderators, should seek to protect from such troublemakers.

Get MY point, my friend?

[SomeRandomDude]

I don't say back down, I just say don't extend it.