Zposter is infamous for having made literally dozens of ban evasion alts and for being entirely unable to fly under the radar with those alts. Circling back to the exact same pet issues every single time and behaving the exact same way.

Just a crank ultra who loves to be a contrarian and stir up struggle sessions.

[–] himbofication@hexbear.net 15 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

As long as you keep banning me for nonsense I'll keep making new accounts. Admins and mods themselves have stated that since they removed the userunion, feedback and appeals comms and avenues the correct way to address any grievance with mod abuse is make a new alt. We are explicitly actively encouraged to keep creating new alts by the mod team so they never have to deal with feedback or appeals.

But if we do what you explicitly told us is our only recourse, that's also ban worthy btw.

Your whole shit is a giant bag of contradictions. Your mods make death threats and when it's brought up, admins look the other way. There's a chilling effect, users notice you doing this. It doesn't go away like you think, it festers and you lose users and nobody values your judgments.

[–] Lyudmila@hexbear.net 10 points 9 months ago

Your mods make death threats

I cannot imagine being so mad about a single removed comment deep in an interpersonal argument that was litigated over a year ago. You keep coming back and banging a drum about the same three or four personal squabbles unendingly.

It's like a depressing, terminally online ultraleftist version of Groundhog Day.

[–] trinicorn@hexbear.net 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

The code of conduct does actually address this, among other relevant topics

If the user comes back under a new account and continues to make trouble, they will be banned.

You can come back under a new account. This ultimately is the case anywhere online, especially anywhere remotely privacy respecting, but if you make it clear you're the same person and/or start doing the same rule-breaking shit, then that's bannable. It could be a bit more explicit, but it's the understood policy for as long as I recall, and only a couple repeatedly-banned users such as yourself seem to take issue with it.

Also relevant:

Be aware of your own enjoyment of the site.

If you find yourself no longer having fun, do something else. There are many different comms on Hexbear, and many different ways to shitpost and have fun.

If the site as a whole is just not cutting it for you, take a break. We'll still be here when you get back. Nothing should compel you to stay.

The site is deliberately designed to be a relaxing sort of fun rather than an addictive one. We do not want you to remain on Hexbear if remaining on the site is no longer fun for you.

If you find yourself logging into the site while not really wanting to, or while knowing that you shouldn't, please contact a moderator and we can provide a ban.

If we ultimately determine that a user has become toxic and is fixated on complaining about the site, we will ban them. We are always open to feedback and suggestions, but if we notice someone that constantly posts / comments about how much they dislike everything then it's probably better for them to find somewhere else to spend their time. The rest of the community has a right to a positive environment.

and...

Lying about moderator interactions (eg saying you were banned or warned for no reason when you were really banned for sectarianism) damages trust in the moderators and makes it less likely that others will come forward with reports about other users, allowing wreckers to fly under the radar and making the site less safe for everyone. Lying about moderator interactions, in any capacity, will lead to a permanent ban without warning.

[–] NewAcctWhoDis@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

If the user comes back under a new account and continues to make trouble, they will be banned.

dsplayer/beluga/melina and Catradora_Stalininsm/HelltakerHomosexual prove that this rule is entirely dependent on how much the admins like you personally.

I'm in and out of this site so I don't know every struggle session that's happened, but it doesn't look like this every actually happened since the rules I quoted are exactly the same.

EDIT: @CARCOSA@hexbear.net sorry I realized posting this without @'ing you is talking about you behind your back

[–] CARCOSA@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Zposter (not the name of the users first account) has had alts for years and believe it or not had admins often speak up for him to be unbanned over the years so it is exactly the same situation as Melina and helltaker.

Ironically I think I've unbanned all three of those people.

The line that is crossed to be banned for ban evasion is either continuing the behavior that got the account banned before the alt is created or using the alt to harass users/mods.

[–] NewAcctWhoDis@hexbear.net 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Did the open discussions for improving the Code of Conduct ever happen?

[–] CARCOSA@hexbear.net 3 points 9 months ago

No they did not but they are still on the list of things to do, after an EMPOC open-floor meta post, and a new moderator drive

[–] trinicorn@hexbear.net 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, it does not appear the CoC has been updated

dsplayer/beluga/melina and Catradora_Stalininsm/HelltakerHomosexual prove that this rule is entirely dependent on how much the admins like you personally.

I can't speak to past treatment, but those people are all currently banned, no? so it's not entirely dependent, just a rule that needs some clarification and to be enforced more rigorously+consistently (but given the nature of opsec and alts, its not actually possible to police them perfectly)

[–] NewAcctWhoDis@hexbear.net 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Both of them were banned and unbanned on their latest accounts, and only kept banned when their behavior became completely indefensible. If the admins had actually addressed the rule between then and now I might feel differently, but why should I think other users the admins like would be/are being treated differently?

(but given the nature of opsec and alts, its not actually possible to police them perfectly)

sure, but like I mentioned in my other comment the admins made it very clear they knew who HeltakerHomosexual was.

[–] trinicorn@hexbear.net 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

yeah I would agree there's an issue with longtime problem users being given too many chances

although zposter might be a good counterexample of someone who was similarly banned and unbanned a lot and hung around a long time despite many blatant rule violations, but was clearly not well liked by the admin team. I would love to see some self-crit on why this phenomenon has occurred with so many harmful users and how to stop it in the future

[–] NewAcctWhoDis@hexbear.net 2 points 9 months ago

although zposter might be a good counterexample of someone who was similarly banned and unbanned a lot and hung around a long time despite many blatant rule violations, but was clearly not well liked by the admin team

This is probably a good point, but (fortunately?) I'm somehow not really familiar with zposter. From context around this thread you're probably right.