Sock-Puppetting and the Current Affairs Forum

Maybe I phrased that wrong, anyway what I'm saying is maybe this isn't as clear cut as it seems.

It's not clear cut if he was making valid arguments or if he was making incoherent arguments in an attempt to make Sinn féin look bad under the guise of being a Sinn féin supporter.

Can you send me a link to the account? I think all the posts from those accounts have been deleted as it stated in your original post where you announced what happened on the Sinn Féin thread.

Can someone please link the McMurphy account for me, I am unable to find it.

I'll have a look through the posts if I realise I was wrong I will have no hesitation in coming back here and admitting it.

It's not clear cut if he was making valid arguments or if he was making incoherent arguments in an attempt to make Sinn féin look bad under the guise of being a Sinn féin supporter.

He was banned for sock puppeting accounts, the true intention of these accounts are still up for debate.

There's no attempt at deflection, I'm making a valid point that maybe the tactic he was supposedly using for the Scumfein account was the true tactic he was using for the rest of the accounts.

I have no way of knowing without looking through the posts myself.

Knowing a bit of the posting history of the account (and a few of the proxy accounts) purely through my own posting history, that line of reasoning is totally devoid of credibility.

As suggested, I'd recommend finding a few of McMurphy, BKelly21 or Cdarby posts and having a look through.

I'm certainly not trying to defend it, Blanch (as you'll see from my most recent post, quite the opposite).....however do I think the clumsy deflection means the poster HarryD is on the SF payroll/ a SF Volunteer/ some sort of sock puppet account, as per your suggestion? I'd take a fair bit more convincing to be honest.

I could, of course be wrong. My suggestion would still stick with my original position; if you suspect any of those are the case, report and ask the mods to investigate rather than just making insinuations on the thread.

It was very straightforward. Once I had the two usernames names helpfully provided by @blackwhite when they posted their example I was able to find evidence of further posts using the the sites own search. only took a few minutes.

I suppose it is pretty easy for me to discuss the issues with SF; I'm as much of a SF voter as you are, Blanch. Despite our significant differences of opinion when it comes to, 'the constitutional question', I think we actually vote the same way, with a preference for SDs and Greens. Given that I was still in D15 for the last election, in all likelihood we voted for the same candidates. I think I've mentioned in the past that when living in NI, I did indeed vote for them, but you're aware enough of the political situation there to realise that was a vote against someone else rather than an endorsement of SF as such. I do happen to have a significant amount of exposure to and experience with the party, and would likely have had more in depth personal interaction with many significant figures within the party than most posters here over the years, so I do tend to get drawn into threads about them.

Given the support that SF currently have, sensible conversation requires SOME input from those who will vote for them, or at least those considering it.

To be honest, I find the influx of, 'well I don't and never have voted for SF, but I'm going to defend absolutely everything they do or say' type of posting more endemic and problematic than the sock puppeting issue.

I've done the same on many occasions myself, Bannasidhe. I've also been called a Shinnerbot on multiple occasions for my trouble.

My point wasn't an all encompassing one, suggesting that anyone who makes any posts that could be seen as defending SF is a Shinnerbot. I was referring to a very specific kind of poster, who doesn't seem to post about anything but SF, will defend absolutely anything that they say or do, but will adamantly claim to not be a SF voter.

One thing I'd say we can all agree on is that the amount of whataboutery is ridiculous. It seems half the time that posters in threads about the government only want to talk about SF......and posters in threads about SF only want to talk about the government parties!

Absolutely. The defend "my" party at all costs is ... irritating.

However, it's not just SF this happens with. There are a few vocal posters who defend govt parties to the hilt - even when those govt parties admit they made a mistake. Those are the posters who like to sling "shinnerbot" at anyone who says "hang on a second".

I agree that sock puppet posters are a menace.

However, I also think anyone who defends at all costs (regardless of who that party is) makes a mess of threads.

Too often, even after (for example) FG have acknowledged a boo-boo there are some posters who will persist in their original defensive position. The result of this is post after post of Panto dialogue. Oh No they Didn't! Oh Yes they Did (and admitted it). We saw it with SF's Inkgate. We saw it with Leo giving a confidential report to a friend. Same meat different gravy.

So you end up with people like me - who votes for parties other that FF/FG/SF - not bothering anymore and threads get polarised as the alternative voices just give up.