Sockpuppets on t'other forum

[brazil nut]

formed part of a plan to conspire to entrap another member of our community and then to report that community member to the police.

Yes, This doesn't feel like a mere human mistake, not designed to harm anyone (to paraphrase from his last post on SE23.Life). Rather it feels very calculated, conspiratorial and designed to entrap. It strikes me that there was much malice aforethought involved in this whole charade, from the account profile (on which he used Jamaican slang "Tun Up!" - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define. ... m=tun%20up), to the accounts he chose to follow (other Jamaican food outlets for instance), to the tweets with which local people engaged in good faith, to the imaginary social media manager, to the setting up and publishing of a Flava Baker gmail address. This was no whim IMO.

[RJM]

Agreed. Fake Twitter ID is one thing, and if what he says is true then it's understandable, but all the selected follows then promoting it all over the .life site to give it credence makes it look much more like a calculated move.

[brazil nut]

then promoting it all over the .life site to give it credence makes it look much more like a calculated move.

In addition, lying outright about Flava Baker to his own community on his own forum after the event, not once but twice
https://se23.life/t/threats-cyber-stalk ... in/12487/5
https://se23.life/t/threats-cyber-stalk ... n/12487/11

[stuart]

Agreed. Fake Twitter ID is one thing, and if what he says is true then it's understandable, but all the selected follows then promoting it all over the .life site to give it credence makes it look much more like a calculated move.

Forums will always have bad boys doing this. That's why they have admins/moderators to spot and root them out. The problem here is its the owner himself who is judge and jury over his own actions (and generally we always observe our own actions over others in a better light). It isn't what either of the two protagonists did by email, twitter or associated posts - it is the trust in the person who guards us against protagonists has been compromised and with that trust evaporates. Or does for some. A split forum isn't going to be a happy or inclusive forum.

So. I suggest, let's stop worrying about what was done. That's history. Be positive - what can the remaining team do to restore confidence?

Perhaps its easier to have that debate here rather than there were people are marking there own homework. I was personally supportive of se23.life at its inception. What needs to be done before me (and other self-exiles) feel confident about returning?

Stuart

[Rachael]

I will never return. Chris will never cede control of the forum to anyone else. And why should he? He owns it. The conventions of what an admin should be, how they should behave are no more than that: conventions. There’s no law that says he can’t do what he’s doing. All we can do is walk away when we don’t like the game being played.

As the great Maya Angelou said, when someone shows you who they really are, believe them the first time.

[brazil nut]

what can the remaining team do to restore confidence?

What needs to be done before me (and other self-exiles) feel confident about returning?

Well, I see now that, even in Chris' supposed absence, the moderation team is seeking to remove a thread that has become problematic for Chris, but were happy for the thread to stand no questions asked when it was just a woman being thrown to the wolves by Chris. That has surely got to raise alarm bells about the current moderation team, their motivations, bias and allegiance?

[brazil nut]

I will never return. Chris will never cede control of the forum to anyone else. And why should he? He owns it. The conventions of what an admin should be, how they should behave are no more than that: conventions. There’s no law that says he can’t do what he’s doing. All we can do is walk away when we don’t like the game being played.

As the great Maya Angelou said, when someone shows you who they really are, believe them the first time.

Well said

[brazil nut]

A reminder of this paragraph from his Personal Introduction on SE26.life (cough cough)

"You may know me from my other forum SE23.life, or from my slightly inflammatory posts in other forums. Whilst I have strong views, I can (usually) back them up with evidence, and always represent myself by my real name and single identity (“chrisbeach”)."

Link: https://se26.life/t/personal-introductions/164

[michael]

I think the revised moderation team deserve a chance to get on with running a good forum. They gave users the option on what to do with the topic. So far only one person has voted to delete the thread, most have voted to leave it as is, and others have voted to close the thread (but leave it visible). I don't think we should criticise people for putting choices to voters (with the possible exception of David Cameron).

Rachael makes a good point and that is why i spent two months off the forum (i found twitter to be much worse). But se23.life is a good forum and every area can benefit from a well run forum. I don't care who owns it but i do care about the fairness of the moderation team. Time will tell if my faith in the other moderators is justified but i hope it is.

[Rachael]

I think the revised moderation team deserve a chance to get on with running a good forum. They gave users the option on what to do with the topic. So far only one person has voted to delete the thread, most have voted to leave it as is, and others have voted to close the thread (but leave it visible). I don't think we should criticise people for putting choices to voters (with the possible exception of David Cameron).

Rachael makes a good point and that is why i spent two months off the forum (i found twitter to be much worse). But se23.life is a good forum and every area can benefit from a well run forum. I don't care who owns it but i do care about the fairness of the moderation team. Time will tell if my faith in the other moderators is justified but i hope it is.

What do you expect the mod team to do, though? How will they achieve what I couldn’t? On any other forum, Chris’s admissions today would earn a life ban. That’s how mods earn trust, by protecting members. That is not possible in this case. Whatever model of moderation existed before, it’s irreparably broken down.

[RJM]

Yep, and when I suggested I'd lost trust I got what I felt was quite an aggressive reply. As if CB was forced into his actions, as opposed to choosing to behave like that

[brazil nut]

The problem here is its the owner himself who is judge and jury over his own actions (and generally we always observe our own actions over others in a better light).

it is the trust in the person who guards us against protagonists has been compromised and with that trust evaporates. Or does for some. A split forum isn't going to be a happy or inclusive forum.

what can the remaining team do to restore confidence?

Due to extraordinary events, this topic has moved on to SE23. But the owner in question is also the owner of SE26.Life, which brings us neatly back to the original post on this thread. This scandal has led to serious doubts being cast over Chris Beach's suitability to be a forum moderator, he has temporarily stepped down from moderation of the SE23 forum and the remaining moderators there are making the right noises at least, but where does this leave SE26.Life? Does he remain judge and jury there? What are the moderators on that forum doing to address the evident sock puppet use by CB on that forum, which surely can no longer be brushed under the carpet and ignored after yesterday's events? Are these questions being asked even?

[Rachael]

I don’t think the SE23 mods are making the right noises at all. They are talking about Chris taking a ‘break’. He’ll be back and nothing will have changed. Moreover, no one is addressing Michael’s post stating that CB has been banned from other forums for sock puppetry. CB’s claims that this is a one-off aberration have not be challenged at all.

Part of the problem is that the person with possibly the most evidence has the least credibility - Nicola.

I have documentary evidence of CB using a sock puppet on Twitter to attack a former forum user - including his own admission that he did. And he used the same excuses - the person he targeted gave him no choice because HE (CB) was the real victim. I wonder what would happen if I passed this evidence to the SE23 mods now? Would it make any difference? I think they are (mostly) good people. But they are fully invested in the narrative he has created.

[Bluesman]

I don’t think the SE23 mods are making the right noises at all. They are talking about Chris taking a ‘break’. He’ll be back and nothing will have changed. Moreover, no one is addressing Michael’s post stating that CB has been banned from other forums for sock puppetry. CB’s claims that this is a one-off aberration have not be challenged at all.

Part of the problem is that the person with possibly the most evidence has the least credibility - Nicola.

I have documentary evidence of CB using a sock puppet on Twitter to attack a former forum user - including his own admission that he did. And he used the same excuses - the person he targeted gave him no choice because HE (CB) was the real victim. I wonder what would happen if I passed this evidence to the SE23 mods now? Would it make any difference? I think they are (mostly) good people. But they are fully invested in the narrative he has created.

Agreed with all of that.

As for whether your evidence would make any difference - surely only one way to find out? Is there any way you could post it on the forum, perhaps suitably redacted, also?

[JGD]

I don’t think the SE23 mods are making the right noises at all. They are talking about Chris taking a ‘break’. He’ll be back and nothing will have changed. Moreover, no one is addressing Michael’s post stating that CB has been banned from other forums for sock puppetry. CB’s claims that this is a one-off aberration have not be challenged at all.

Part of the problem is that the person with possibly the most evidence has the least credibility - Nicola.

I have documentary evidence of CB using a sock puppet on Twitter to attack a former forum user - including his own admission that he did. And he used the same excuses - the person he targeted gave him no choice because HE (CB) was the real victim. I wonder what would happen if I passed this evidence to the SE23 mods now? Would it make any difference? I think they are (mostly) good people. But they are fully invested in the narrative he has created.

If evidence of Rachael's proposition is required, look at this

Hi Brett.

Chris (the forum owner for those unaware) has recognised he made a mistake. He’s left the moderation team and participation in the forum for an unspecified period of time which I think all would agree is the right call. In the circumstances I’m not sure there is much more he could do.

The forum itself, cannot, in my opinion, survive without Chris. As I mentioned elsewhere he puts a huge amount of unseen effort managing the other social media elements, generating content, improving the site from a user experience perspective.

Chris made a mistake, and a big one at that. He will need to rebuilt trust amongst the forum members when he returns, and he can only do that through his actions. I personally believe he can but everyone will need to make their own mind up when he returns. In the meantime we will try and keep the site up and running and functional.

SE23 would be poorer in my view for not having this site - it’s achieved and helped with some great projects like the mural, FH library, meet-ups for newbies to the area, finding cats etc, and all on a modern platform that’s easy to use across multiple platforms. None of this would be there without Chris. So whilst he has made an error that he deeply regrets I think he deserves an opportunity to come back and show it won’t be repeated.

This forum and others, be they on facebook, twitter etc should actually be able to work together around common causes - I’d hope that those on the forum and off it read this and we all have a bit of self reflection about if what we are doing is really serving a purpose (or at least trying to be positive). There are many many great people working in the community here - parents at my son’s school will have raised probably close to £15-20k this year for the school, I know someone raising medical supplies to send to Venezuela, we have volunteers in local libraries and elsewhere, campaigns to save green spaces, campaigns to reduce air pollution, campaigns to encourage swifts - the lists go on and on - it would be ideal if everyone who had some spare energy put them into the vast array of possibly great causes, local and international, instead of sniping at each other (a minority of course).

I’m now off my soap box.

Sorry Brett, I think I went offtrack…

Al

Hugely informative about the moderators' (is it collective?) mindset that anyone who is not onboard with the view that Chris is only a little mischievous and has made a mistake is deemed to be in a minority and cannot possibly be be working for the good of the wider community. And that minority should anticipate being moderated soon by the enforcer-in-chief, Londondrz. He lives out-of-town too.

Our communities are and will be what they are and we must hope they will act for the greater good, with our without Chris Beach or for that matter SE23.life. Perhaps Chris's greatest weakness is his predisposition to upset the great and the good in our communities and to traduce their good names and efforts.

In the last few minutes a question has been put to me about why another moderator has begun a drive to delete the thread and further hide Chris's mis-demeanours. Why so ? Why move the debate to Local Politics where it further restricts who can see it. And only after Chris's road-crash revelation of his wrong-doing.

Perhaps the need to prevent future employers or clients from seeing the mendacious nature of the man ?

On Rachael's point about Nicola - she is being advised to maintain a silence for the meantime. She is receiving liberal doses of vitriol in private emails - some from moderators - and accusations of her errors whilst the writers ignore Chris Beach's tissue of lies and actions in committing his grossest of errors - the self-revelation of his family's details.

[Bluesman]

If evidence of Rachael's proposition is required, look at this
<QUOTE SNIPPED>

I agree with all of Rachaels' proposition and am well aware of plenty of CB's underhand activities. The evidence I was referring to was specifically to do with use of a sock puppet on the forum and whether presenting this could make any difference to the moderators team.

Perhaps the need to prevent future employers or clients from seeing the mendacious nature of the man ?

This is a good point but might also be just to prevent Nicola from giving her own input to the thread. Or, more prosaically, to prevent the se23.com admin from making mischief. They really wouldn't like that.

[Rachael]

I don’t think the SE23 mods are making the right noises at all. They are talking about Chris taking a ‘break’. He’ll be back and nothing will have changed. Moreover, no one is addressing Michael’s post stating that CB has been banned from other forums for sock puppetry. CB’s claims that this is a one-off aberration have not be challenged at all.

Part of the problem is that the person with possibly the most evidence has the least credibility - Nicola.

I have documentary evidence of CB using a sock puppet on Twitter to attack a former forum user - including his own admission that he did. And he used the same excuses - the person he targeted gave him no choice because HE (CB) was the real victim. I wonder what would happen if I passed this evidence to the SE23 mods now? Would it make any difference? I think they are (mostly) good people. But they are fully invested in the narrative he has created.

Agreed with all of that.

As for whether your evidence would make any difference - surely only one way to find out? Is there any way you could post it on the forum, perhaps suitably redacted, also?

I will confess the thing that holds me back is cowardice. Until now I have not been subjected to the online psychological warfare that others who have stood up to him have suffered. My twitter presence is an important part of my professional life. Quite frankly, I’m afraid of the repercussions.

CB already knows I have this evidence and so far his only response (that I’m aware of) is a PM to ask me why I posted lies about him (this was a few month ago). Are the stakes higher now? The information certainly has a different weight now the question is a specific one: is CB a serial sock puppeteer or not?

If the SE23 mods are doing serious due diligence, they will be reading this thread. I am still a member of SE23 Life and anyone can PM if they want my input.

[JGD]

I will confess the thing that holds me back is cowardice. Until now I have not been subjected to the online psychological warfare that others who have stood up to him have suffered. My twitter presence is an important part of my professional life. Quite frankly, I’m afraid of the repercussions.

CB already knows I have this evidence and so far his only response (that I’m aware of) is a PM to ask me why I posted lies about him (this was a few month ago). Are the stakes higher now? The information certainly has a different weight now the question is a specific one: is CB a serial sock puppeteer or not?

If the SE23 mods are doing serious due diligence, they will be reading this thread. I am still a member of SE23 Life and anyone can PM if they want my input.

Cowardice is not the first trait I would associate with Rachael. She too has had the truncheon of Londondrz wielded in her direction albeit she outsmarted him by ignoring his attack.

It still makes me laugh out loud when I recall her remarks about the putative attack.

I too am a member of SE23.life - and SE26.life and SE6.life. Respectively I have had my thousand year ban on the first two commuted to just under 10 years until January, 2029: inexplicably my thousand year ban is still present on SE6.life.

My point is .life @moderators should feel free to contact me also - if they want to discuss any particular infraction - I have a wealth of evidence too. But then as CB has falsely accused me of threatening him and all of his moderators, perhaps an intransigence or immutable fear exists there about which I can do nothing. That would be strange of course as I do see moderators from time to time in the pub and I neither see nor sense any fear in them.

[starman]

In the last few minutes a question has been put to me about why another moderator has begun a drive to delete the thread and further hide Chris's mis-demeanours. Why so ? Why move the debate to Local Politics where it further restricts who can see it. And only after Chris's road-crash revelation of his wrong-doing.

Perhaps the need to prevent future employers or clients from seeing the mendacious nature of the man ?

A move to Local Politics only restricts who can contribute. All members and non-members can still view the topic and its contents. The move was probably a snap decision but in retrospect the right one. There is far too much potential for that thread to really go wrong. Though I do admit it is a shame that a number of contributors who contributed will now not be able too.

[JGD]

There is far too much potential for that thread to really go wrong. Though I do admit it is a shame that a number of contributors who contributed will now not be able too.

Solid technical response starman - and those of us who once were regulars - and I had attained Trust Level 4 plus a range of awards - know that.

There is silence on the issue of why there is a rush to delete the thread.

The poll set up by the out-of-town moderator Londondrz is showing 68% in favour of leaving the thread as is and only 5% to delete it..

I sense that on the forum, there is real trepidation from mods and members about the potential for that thread to go really wrong, just as you say.

But what can that possibly mean ? Make Chris Beach's aberrant behaviour seem worse or indeed better ?

A real paradox for those that have that problem to manage out.

And how is it proposed by them to shape comment on other forums one way or the other - it is evident from commentary that this thread itself is being watched closely by mods there.