User JohanCruyff
 

Is PITTM. JohanCruyff

PITTM Last Post IP:

189.164.80.149

JohanCruyff IP:

189.164.80.149


That is all.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

Yeah, it must be. Cruyff is the most famous player to ever play for Barcelona, a team PITTM supports.

I just looked at his posts and the one in the summer transfer thread is obviously from him as he is impressively also a Manchester United fan. Add to that the Bill Walsh thread and it's got to be him.

I think he should be either banned or left alone. Keeping him around and changing his title seems like the worst possible way to go.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

I think you should reset his title if you're not going to also ban him. Isn't the idea of the punishment to strip him of his identity around here?

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you should reset his title if you're not going to also ban him. Isn't the idea of the punishment to strip him of his identity around here?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

I'm going to have a little fun with this by making it obvious we know, but are turning the other way - hopefully to encourage a better RJ in the future. In the mod abuse thread.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

well he is banned now, and his post gone. Anyone save it for posterity?

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

FWIW not banning him would be ridic. Banning has to mean something.

Also- even for people we are banning, custom titles shouldn't be given without premission (unless they're like "banned").

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW not banning him would be ridic.

Banning has to mean something.

Also- even for people we are banning, custom titles shouldn't be given without premission (unless they're like "banned").

[/ QUOTE ]

yes

yes

no, give me a break.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

Somehow I missed the RJ ban. Did it happen when he started up another one of his ATF whine-a-thons?

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
Somehow I missed the RJ ban. Did it happen when he started up another one of his ATF whine-a-thons?

[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo lol

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

All,

I don't get this. There are many banned users who come back and post. How long did perma-banned yves post here with mods aware of that fact?

I think you guys take bans way too seriously, especially for stuff like this case where it's more for being an annoyance than anything else.

I get banning "RJPITTM2" or some similar account. But a guy comes back with a new account and is not posting as version 2 of banned account or anything like that, I don't see why he should be banned given the existing precedents.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
All,

I don't get this. There are many banned users who come back and post. How long did perma-banned yves post here with mods aware of that fact?

I think you guys take bans way too seriously, especially for stuff like this case where it's more for being an annoyance than anything else.

I get banning "RJPITTM2" or some similar account. But a guy comes back with a new account and is not posting as version 2 of banned account or anything like that, I don't see why he should be banned given the existing precedents.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am with Diablo here. There was no reason to ban him unless he stepped out of line by letting the cat out of the bag (like YS) or if he continued down the same path (like RJ). A ban is losing your identity, only rarely is it really that strongly enforced where people cannot come back under new user names - PITTM's mistake was making it obvious (you probably missed that post Diablo, it was deleted within 5 minutes after i saw it).

Personally I would have give guys like him enough rope, RJ was busy grabbing all the rope he could this morning.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

El D,

I think that people who were mildly observant and non-mods knew it was RJ, and that is what mods were taking issue with? The fact that they knew was because RJ was acting like RJ and saying what RJ would say.

However, I don't believe the mods should be going out of their way to "out" a poster like RJ who (I believe) was axed mostly for being an annoyance. His ban should be "sorry you lose your identity" not "ban on sight" or whatever. So as long as he isn't banworthy in his new account, he shouldn't be banned, and shouldn't be outed by the mods.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

This was Ryan's call. I'll let him explain.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

I just want to add that I am perfectly okay with him being banned forever.

I don't believe he is a positive force on this site. On the other hand, I also don't mind if he's allowed to stay. I don't believe he is very important one way or another.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
But a guy comes back with a new account and is not posting as version 2 of banned account or anything like that

[/ QUOTE ]

I really don't care one way or the other nor do I have a strong opinion about RJ as a poster. However, I just wanted to point out, that within the first 10 posts of his new account, he had posted in the thread that got him banned in the first place, posting exactly the same kind of thing that got him banned in the first place. Thats how several mods (including me) were even able to guess that it was RJ.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

Mat,

Just for the record, I'm just stating my opinions here. I don't give a rat's ass either way about whether he is banned or not. Though I don't believe he's more of a "negative force" than countless worthless posters. And that is coming from someone who has had extensive and very annoying arguments with him on the forums. I definitely fully understand the annoyance/prick component of RJ.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

Actually this is why I lean towards a permaban. Of all the things you and I or anyone could be talking about, why him?

Why not a rat's ass? Unlike many others who have been critical, he has made posts about me which are simply false. If I have to spend time correcting that, it's a waste of my time.

Especially if other users don't value him. And therefore, I realize as I type this, I do believe he is worse than worthless. Not much worse, but definitely worse.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

I would do the same if it were any other banned member. He essentially announced who he was right away and continued where he left off.

That's a pretty blatant violation of a ban, and I'm never comfortable allowing users to do that. It sends a message that you can do almost whatever you want and bans only mean a loss of name.

I'm not sure that I'm ready to say he's ban on sight, but it's very close to that.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

I think in general the policy of letting banned users come back on new accounts is a bad one, especially when they do it like the next day after being banned.

I think it's weird how RJ's ban happened, because it seemed like Mat kinda baited him into it, but I also understand Mat's position on the guy.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Somehow I missed the RJ ban. Did it happen when he started up another one of his ATF whine-a-thons?

[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo lol

[/ QUOTE ]

Link? I found one thread in a search but it was massive, so I didn't scour it to see if it was the one that resulted in a ban.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Somehow I missed the RJ ban. Did it happen when he started up another one of his ATF whine-a-thons?

[/ QUOTE ]
Bingo lol

[/ QUOTE ]

Link? I found one thread in a search but it was massive, so I didn't scour it to see if it was the one that resulted in a ban.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...n=0&page=0

Drama is in the middle somewhere IIRC

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
All,

I don't get this. There are many banned users who come back and post. How long did perma-banned yves post here with mods aware of that fact?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more of a point on the general crappiness of certain mods who were protecting yves at the time right after his megapermasuperban when he was blatantly posting as yves like nothing happened.

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW not banning him would be ridic.

Banning has to mean something.

Also- even for people we are banning, custom titles shouldn't be given without premission (unless they're like "banned").

[/ QUOTE ]

yes

yes

meh

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: User JohanCruyff
 

gild,

the funny thing is that my original version of that post was "yes yes meh."

guess i should have left it alone.