On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 07:11 -0500, Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:05:47 -0500, "The Mangoe" the.mangoe@gmail.com wrote:
I'm looking at the "sooper seekret" message (as it appears on Wikitruth), and I see a list of signs that one is dealing with a troll/sockpuppet, generally in the form of "new people don't act this way." !! was held to fulfill every one of them, and yet the identification turned out to be faulty.
No it didn't - !! *is* a returning user.
But Durova wasn't simply giving a cookbook in the identification of a returning user (even there, it might not be a false positive here, we already have argument in the rest of unquoted part of the post as to how it could easily provide false positive). The sooper seekret evidence starts off in the first paragraph indicating the following example was one of a returning WR-related troll/abuser.
Please remember this thread started with the message by The Mangoe about the circumstantial arguments that were used to justify sockpuppetry blocks, not whether it correctly or not identify someone as a returning user (in good standing or otherwise).
KTC