How lenient should we be to JohnL?

[ohio jones]

For quite some time, and more vociferously in several recent threads, accusations have been made about JohnL and his relationship to truth (and to MaxPC, whose relationship to truth also appeared tenuous). If you’ve been reading those threads you are familiar with the situation, so I won’t repeat all of that here. Nor will I post scriptures about the importance of telling truth; we all are familiar with them. But the truth is a serious matter, and untruth is a distraction from the forum community.

The moderators have given him opportunity to respond to several specific questions, and he has left most of them unanswered, or answered only partially in ways that cannot be verified (as did Max in response to a similar request years ago).

Neto has suggested that we might require posters to use their real names or identify themselves before they can post. We are not necessarily inclined to take that step, but if we do have reason to ask for identification, we expect you to provide it. This forum is a place for caution in what is posted publicly, but it is not a place for secrets among each other.

Here is a sample of the information available to the moderators that links the accounts of JohnL and MaxPC. There’s plenty more where this comes from. Note that the post is by MaxPC, and that JohnL has also posted multiple times from the same IP address.



Those of us who are Anabaptists are no doubt familiar with the Matthew 18 process of dealing with a brother overtaken in a fault. We have reached the point where the next step is to “take it to the assembly” (the word “church” used in most translations is anachronistic in this passage, and the forum is not a church anyway; but we are a community of believers).

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.

[barnhart]

I didn't realize JohnL and MaxPC on occasion share the same IP address. It's hard not to see that as deception. That changes the way I interact with him.

[Neto]

My "suggestion" to require all of us to completely identify ourselves was along with the thought that individuals should not be expected to do something that is not required of everyone. (Or openly offered, as I did in that same post, as a demonstration of my own willingness to see that fully carried out.)

I have not attempted to identify anyone by proper name, and the majority who participate here are unknown to me, having only met a very few of you all in person.

The deal about IP addresses is, I suspect, something that only the Admins can see. (That statement was not entirely clear, but I am assuming that what was being said is that JohnL posted from the same IP address as did MaxPC. If this is what was meant, then one should consider all situations in which this might be possible. Do IP addresses ever get reused, as is the case with telephone numbers? I do not know.)

EDIT:
A brief search brought up this result. (My understanding is that whereas your telephone number 'belonged to you' until you intentionally relinquished it, your IP Address can be changed by providers without your knowledge.)
https://nrs.help/internet-privacy/your- ... t-happens/

[Anthony]

Just because theres like 10 active posters and everyone at this point knows about JohnL id rather keep him than ban. It is harmless though very strange.

[temporal1]

This approach is very different for the forum, and not easy. It’s painful.
i’ve never wanted anyone banned, but i understand, respect and accept mods’ decisions.

- - - - - - -

The breaking point for me is faking death.
i can’t accept that as harmless.

i found a resource about it, because no one else seems to be bothered by it.
was i over reacting? .. maybe. but it’s not “nothing”.

there are pathologies associated with lying, assuming various personas, multiple personalities, etc.
i don’t believe any forum members are psychiatriists.

also, esp without penalty, patterns tend to escalate over time. a petty thief may become an abuser, etc.

most of all, i’m glad it’s not my decision.

“Is Faking Your Death a Crime? Fraud and Penalties”
“Faking your death can trigger federal fraud charges, forged document crimes, and Social Security violations — with penalties that don't pause while you hide.”
https://legalclarity.org/is-it-a-crime- ... own-death/

.. The legal line gets crossed the moment you create false evidence of your death.
Staging an accident scene, planting a suicide note, arranging for someone to report you as a drowning victim — these actions manufacture a false legal reality. That false reality triggers government records, insurance payouts, estate proceedings, and benefit payments, each of which carries its own criminal exposure.

The crime isn’t in leaving. It’s in making the world believe you’re dead. ..

Moral, if not legal problems.

[Szdfan]

I’m going to point out that there is another frequent poster who changed their username, pretended that they were someone else and aggressively demanded that we keep the secret after I figured it out and outed them.
While they have their reasons for this deception, I find them unconvincing.

The issue for me isn’t that this person changed their username, it’s that they deceived the community. While this person was posting under their new username, other participants were asking what happened to this person and why they disappeared.

I find it hypocritical that this user has also been vocally calling out JohnL when they did the exact same thing.

Robert allowed this deception. That was his call and I accepted it. However, If JohnL is going to be banned for deceiving the community about his identity, then I think the moderators should be consistent.

This of course raises the question about usernames in general. I know this will shock you, but “Szdfan” is not on my birth certificate.

[temporal1]

Esp after the last forum reset, a number of members registered with new or altered usernames.
Some made an open statement about it.

Legally, in the world, multiple names are ok, EXCEPT if used for illegal purposes, not ok.

The matter of importance of privacy on the internet, including this public forum, has been addressed (in my view).
Even mods have usernames (i presume) aren’t on their birth certificates.

(i’m pretty sure mods know or have a pretty good idea about who’s who and what’s what on forum.)

i have no problem with this private forum having subjective rules+leadership.
i may not always understand or agree, i still appreciate, respect, and accept mods’ decisions.

imho, this forum is a privilege, a choice, not a requirement or right.

it’s worth the price of admission.

[ken_sylvania]

• If JohnL and MaxPC are actually the same person, her or she has done better than I could at keeping the writing styles segregated by character.
• There's a couple other posters who regularly post half-truths or even outright falsehoods, although that is normally restricted to certain topics and I think they might actually believe what they are posting.
• Not all of us use our real names when posting, and I don't think we should be required to.
• Perhaps the creator of MaxPC and JohnL regards it as a bit of a theater performance - characters playing a role as in a play, and as such perhaps he/she considers it not really lies and deception. Many Anabaptists reject that line of reasoning and in fact that is part of the argument against plays and theater - the actors are pretending to be someone they are not.
• If the moderators do decide to allow MaxPC to stay around, I think it would be better if the rest of us would refrain from constantly challenging his stories. I don't think the constant bickering and sniping is healthy for us.

[temporal1]

• If JohnL and MaxPC are actually the same person, her or she has done better than I could at keeping the writing styles segregated by character.
• There's a couple other posters who regularly post half-truths or even outright falsehoods, although that is normally restricted to certain topics and I think they might actually believe what they are posting.
• Not all of us use our real names when posting, and I don't think we should be required to.
• Perhaps the creator of MaxPC and JohnL regards it as a bit of a theater performance - characters playing a role as in a play, and as such perhaps he/she considers it not really lies and deception. Many Anabaptists reject that line of reasoning and in fact that is part of the argument against plays and theater - the actors are pretending to be someone they are not.
• If the moderators do decide to allow MaxPC to stay around, I think it would be better if the rest of us would refrain from constantly challenging his stories. I don't think the constant bickering and sniping is healthy for us.

Any specific thoughts wrt having his grandson contact admin about his death? Or impersonating his grandson to do so?
This bothers me an awful lot. Worse, as it was directed to Robert, with whom he seemed to have a special online friendship.
This goes beyond superficial games to me. It’s painful.

This situation most reminds me of Liam. i’ve wondered if this is Liam.

[ken_sylvania]

The deal about IP addresses is, I suspect, something that only the Admins can see. (That statement was not entirely clear, but I am assuming that what was being said is that JohnL posted from the same IP address as did MaxPC. If this is what was meant, then one should consider all situations in which this might be possible. Do IP addresses ever get reused, as is the case with telephone numbers? I do not know.)

EDIT:
A brief search brought up this result. (My understanding is that whereas your telephone number 'belonged to you' until you intentionally relinquished it, your IP Address can be changed by providers without your knowledge.)
https://nrs.help/internet-privacy/your- ... t-happens/

Yes, IP addresses can be reassigned. The chance of MaxPC's phone number being reassigned within four months after his "death" to another individual who promptly gets on MennoNet and starts posting is really quite remote.