How lenient should we be to JohnL?

[temporal1]

i’m wondering if MaxPC or JohnL (or a new character) will add to this topic? Or disappear?

The willingness to remain active/undaunted under former scrutiny was impressive. Confidence in self?
There must be a pathology there.

eccentric_rambler wrote:
.. What troubles me is the thought of new members who do not know the lore either believing him or finding his schtick irritating enough they don't stay. ..

yes. it’s summer, the forum typically is quieter with fewer active members.
“everybody knows” .. is easier.

i hope his new schtick is no schtick at all.
that may not be possible.

[JohnH]

This saga has hearkened back to the days of yore in Internet forums, when schticks, performance art, sockpuppets, and people recreating accounts happened frequently and was woven into the fabric of how forums functioned. There might be accusations, and sometimes someone would conduct an investigation and expose someone.

People had to make the choice if they wanted to ignore someone. Some people used their real names; some used pseudonyms but were well known; others were completely anonymous.

ok.
i presume, and i hope, even with the poll, decisions by mods will be by their discretion, not poll results, alone?
(i don’t understand the forum to be a straight-up democracy.) nor do i want it so.

Should the mods ignore this request of yours, lest they being democratic?

[temporal1]

This saga has hearkened back to the days of yore in Internet forums, when schticks, performance art, sockpuppets, and people recreating accounts happened frequently and was woven into the fabric of how forums functioned. There might be accusations, and sometimes someone would conduct an investigation and expose someone.

People had to make the choice if they wanted to ignore someone. Some people used their real names; some used pseudonyms but were well known; others were completely anonymous.

ok.
i presume, and i hope, even with the poll, decisions by mods will be by their discretion, not poll results, alone?
(i don’t understand the forum to be a straight-up democracy.) nor do i want it so.

Should the mods ignore this request of yours, lest they being democratic?

i hope and trust mods will read and use their own discretion, including wrt my thoughts.

as the OP describes, this is a new tack for the forum.
Robert was clear about his “executive order”, that was fine. i believe this will be fine, and i hope so. i’m hoping to learn.

as the OP describes, it’s different.

[cmbl]

It’s rare for a person to be banned from the forum (bots are another matter), but it has happened a few times, usually by executive order. This time we are asking for your input and would like to reach a community consensus on whether to do so, or not. Please vote accordingly.

This thread will probably be archived at some point after a decision is made.

As overused as the word "relationships" is in my circles, I will use it. Relationships are built on trust. The sockpuppet should be banned.

[PeterG]

The untruthfulness that Max/JohnL represents is corrosive to healthy interactions both in real life and online. I believe he should be banned.

[temporal1]

One option is: “Let him post.”
Is there a reason there’s not an alternate option, such as: “He shouldn’t post.” (?)

Most of the options might imply the latter. (?)

In case it's not clear, that's the last option, The Ban.

The Ban.

If i recall, on MD, The Ban wasn’t mercilous.
The person could approach mods privately, to work things out, to return, with agreed understanding.

New to forums, and Anabaptists, i was impressed, i felt it followed the Spirit of the Law.
i don’t know of this working out in even one example. Still, it seems a good way.

Did i understand this correctly? Does it continue?

i try to remind my family, there is 1 unforgivable sin.
this whole thing makes my head hurt.

[R7ehr]

I’m not a supporter of permanent bans.
I am a supporter of conditional and open ended and long term bans. I think there should be an avenue of reconciliation and reinstatement available for everyone.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I recall getting piled upon when I stated that I believed that "MaxPc" was neither real nor dead. I never believed it, and always believed there was something else up.

My sole problem is whether this persona is a fake as well? Seems more consistent than a "Plain Catholic" and his theology is not too different than some Baptists that I know. Was "Max" a "sock puppet" and this real, or neither real? I just don't know. Having been raised catholic, I just found some of Max's posts a bit painful. I suspected him of attempting to proselytize for popery. Was his intent to get into disputes? Once again, I don't know.

My take on it is that a short leash would be the most judicious call.

[Wesleyb]

I really wasn’t sure at first, but after reading this thread I am reluctantly coming down on the side of the ban. One reason I read this forum is to understand what real people are thinking, and the logic (or lack thereof) that shapes their views. Allowing posters who are not real people undermines that. At some point for both MaxPC and JohnL I decided they were fake, or at least not completely truthful and read their posts with that in mind or skipped them altogether. It did bother me though to see others interacting with them as if they were real. If I’m spending time here I want it to be with people who are who they claim to be. I don’t know the motive behind the effort that went into this. I speculated a bit in the other thread. There are other possibilities, some of them more sinister.

[temporal1]

I recall getting piled upon when I stated that I believed that "MaxPc" was neither real nor dead. I never believed it, and always believed there was something else up.

My sole problem is whether this persona is a fake as well? Seems more consistent than a "Plain Catholic" and his theology is not too different than some Baptists that I know. Was "Max" a "sock puppet" and this real, or neither real? I just don't know. Having been raised catholic, I just found some of Max's posts a bit painful. I suspected him of attempting to proselytize for popery. Was his intent to get into disputes? Once again, I don't know.

My take on it is that a short leash would be the most judicious call.

i accepted MaxPC until i didn’t; not that he wasn’t somehow real, but that he wasn’t always as he seemed.

i guessed his Catholic missteps were simply that he presumed ignorance of Catholics on forum - not so!
he referred to himself as the resident Catholic .. seeming to enjoy the reference. to me, that was just ignorance.

“In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king” so he thought.

as well, he said he’d been specifically invited to join, but silent about by whom.

to repeat, for me, the deal breaker was the grandson contacting the forum about his death.
that crossed the line beyond just being annoying.

both personas regularly ignore pointed questions, cheerfully moving right along to another topic, corny jokes, or passive-aggressive slights about whomever asked an unwanted question. like clockwork.

i wasn’t an early problem detector, i don’t believe i ever have been. i try to be conscious of this lack of early awareness.
i’m not good at it.