VOTE FOR PROPOSED RULE HERE
The following proposed rule is up for community vote. See this thread for discussion of the rule, and this post for the approved wording of the proposed rule.
The rule will pass with 60% of votes supporting it. Poll will be open for 7 days (until Monday night 8/30 Eastern).
Proposed Rule: If a poster is banned via moderator action–either temporarily or permanently–any non-passive behavior made on another account will result in that account being permanently suspended. Non-passive behavior is defined as posting, voting in polls, and other actions determined to be hostile at the discretion of the moderators.
Do you approve of the wording for this proposed rule?
[Edit: The poll language is unclear. This is a vote for or against the rule.]
The new account gets a perma not the old one, I assume?
It seems clear to me that “that account” refers to the “another account” referenced immediately before.
So I think your interpretation is the correct one, but it doesn’t hurt to clarify that interpretation.
1 Like
Creating a sockpuppet to circumvent discipline should be an IP ban on both the original and new account regardless of how it’s used.
1 Like
Seems a bit extreme. I think we would owe about a dozen IP bans if that were the case.
Sacrifices have to be made. It is regrettable, but the greater good must be served.
No measure is too extreme or too bloodthirsty.
Is a banned person who uses a sockpuppet to skirt the rules going to respect them when they get unbanned?
We just want some respect for authority
voted no because i think voting in polls should be allowed/considered passive.
2 Likes
I voted yes despite agreeing with you that a ban should not prohibit someone from voting. I expect we can amend the rule to allow voting.
1 Like
Poll is closed and proposal passes with >60% of the vote. Added to thread of consolidated forum rules.