Clarification on sock usage

While this won't affect most of you you might want to peruse it anyways.

Basically it boils down to this: You should not do anything with a sock that you can not or would not do with your regular username.

This includes, but is by no means limited too, posting in reply to yourself, posting spam, posting flames, and creating spam threads.

Also, I would like to remind people that you are allowed only three socks.

That's about it, if you are worried about your own scheme falling under this ask and I'll give you my opinion.

 

Since when have we only been allowed three socks? I must have missed something.

 

on'y 3?



what if we have...uh... MORE...uh... than 3?

 

I draw your attention to this thread.

 

You're missing a "link="

 

Poo. I always thought it was five. Either way, I have an excess of socks. I am in VIOLATION of the rules. BANE ME!

 

I still say farrie as an admin is probably teh funniest damn thing I've seen all year.

Sorry, what were you saying?

 

Farraday being a mod is like when I kid I know got voted to be captain of my football team. Sure, he's the captain, but no one does anything he says.

 

LOL

Very good analogy.

 

He's very serious about this, I assure you.

Vertical

 

Yes, to Vert you listen.

farra is very serious about this.

 

In truth, for those who doubt the effectiveness or legitimacy of this policy, you must understand that this is really nothing new. When one uses a sock, one doesn't become invincible to the rules of the forums, you can't "cloak" yourself and expect to suddenly be void of the laws and regulations that have been established.

• "When it comes to moderating, the admins will treat your socks' posts exactly as they'd treat them if they were posted under your 'main' username, so 'talking to yourself' is liable to get you spanked for spamming."
  
  -NathanDahlin

The Advisory Council thought this would be a great idea to enforce because it sets in stone an unspoken rule that's been enforced in a bit of a silent manner. As for someone being allotted 3 socks or less, this was suggested by none other then the members, and it?s been around for a long time. Way back in the day when the latest fashion in Community was to have more socks then post counts people began to get bothered by all of the alternative identities and duo aliases. This is why that policy exists, and has existed for a long time, and the Advisory Council wasn?t adverse in any way to keeping it a consistent rule.

Now, don't assume that it means your socks will suddenly become the public knowledge of your posting cohorts, you're privacy is still at your own personal discretion, all this means is that you're going to be held accountable for what your respective "others" do.

All in all, this was approved by us because we noticed a growing trend in the use of socks for flaming and trolling, and the vast majority of AC members agreed that it was of benefit to the membership as a whole to outlaw usage of socks in these methods.

I'll talk a bit more about this new policy with some quotes in this week's AC update.

 

It's about time someone explained the "unwritten" rules of the JC in detail. Thanks Telly

 

Oh lord, you want to start enforcing the unwritten rules?

Welcome to the jungle.

 

Hippos live in the jungle.

 

Unwritten Rules? You mean that states you must create Internet Drama at every possible opportunity?

 

Looks like a great policy farraday!

Now I know a certain spammer who won't be able to continue his or her mission of insanity...

 

that 3 sock rule has been discussed for a while, about time to, there are some other rules that i would like too, but you must be 18 to hear about them

oh, and who is buyinghteir Ep 2 tickets today?

 

Dan brought up a legitimate issue. What does one do if one were to hypothetically have in excess of three socks. Since we're speaking hypothetically, let's ask what one does if one were to have waaaay in excess of three socks?

I had a whole unrelated thread here in community several months back and the conclusion reached by mods was " ? "

I guess basically, the question is:

What is the proper procedure for retiring old or excess socks?

Does one PM Nathan or a manager giving them the name to erase. What is the means to verifiy that such a case is true.

For example, obviously if I send a PM to Nathan saying "Please remove my sock, farraday," hopefully he won't do so just because I ask him to. farraday might get rather upset.

So what then is the proper way to handle a situation where one is not in accordance with the limits on the number of socks one may have.

Or is there simply just some sort of "Don't ask, don't tell" policy in force?

 

I was under the impression that you simply stopped using your excess socks. Perhaps I'm missing out on yet another unwritten rule though.

 

It really doesn't matter if you have more than 3 socks, what matters is whether you are USING more than 3 socks.

You can choose to just not use them, or you can PM a mod with the ones you no longer need, and their passwords and they can do what they want with them.

They are not banning all socks, they are saying play with your socks responsibly. They still identify as you, even if most of the community doesn't know that it is you.


They will not ban you just for having that many...

right farraday/vertical ?
(feel free to correct me if I misinterpreted)

 

A minor note, the actual rule:

"The administration fully grants members the right to have a reasonable number of socks (any number over 3 will likely result in your being questioned about this), but we encourage everyone to post with their actual username most of the time, so that other members can get to know you.

What constitutes "use" of a sock. Just as long as a sock isn't posting, then it's okay to exceed the limit? That seems to be what some people (regular users) are saying. At face value, that seems pretty reasonable right.

So, is it okay if I have my "Poll Platoon" of 150 socks overwhelm any and all polls that I come across, just as long as I only post any actual responses with only 3 of those socks. Does the administration see poll voting as a "sock use?" And does the administration have any problems whatsoever of exceeding a three-sock limit to use multiple socks to vote in polls.

 

I can't speak for the rest of the admins, but in the course of my duties if I run across someone with a sock excess I PM them and ask them to pick their three favourite then name ban the rest.

Note I'm not talking about someone with 4 sock or five II usually let those sldie sinc one or two generally haven't been used for months. But if you have ten or twelve socks I'm probably going to contact you about it.

Conversely, if you have a dynamic IP or use multiple computers it obviously becomes very hard to track down all your usernames, in that case I'm much less likely to be lienent especially given the time involved in hnting down your aliases or if what set off the hunt was an abuse of the sock policy.

 

does the administration have any problems whatsoever of exceeding a three-sock limit to use multiple socks to vote in polls.

Well, what's the point of a poll, a census, if you stuff the ballot box?

 

That's my question - what exactly constitutes "sock use." Actively posting with it, or something else. It seems to me, that as long as something's not a noticeable problem (i.e. 100 different "GenghisN" socks getting into an argument with themselves, it's perfectly acceptable - the old "out of sight, out of mind" adage.

But, that ignores that one person's point of starting a poll may be entirely compromised by someone else's passive use of socks to "nudge" poll results.

That may not be a large problem, but it is certainly directly related to the "sock-use" law.

farraday, for example said if he see an excessive number of socks, he's going to come down hard. But what if no one sees it, is it still acceptable?

I hardly think mods are policing poll voters who haven't written a response to a poll thread - if they're even able to do so at all. The only thing such socks may injure are the results of some guy's poll - which is hardly a major issue at all.