Does everyone like having this place to talk about warbirds?

[warbird1]

What is "account spoofing"?

Posting under several different names at different periods, in this case 'sabredriver', HGUSU and Migace to name but a few.

There are at least 2 maybe 3 other people who post regularly here under different aliases. Does that constitute "account spoofing" or is it only if it was done because of a previous banning? Just curious, as I know somebody who wants to create two different user names. They are a well known warbird "persona", but wish to post anonymously under one name in order to protect their reputation, while keeping their real name for other more "formal" posts.

[airnutz]

What is "account spoofing"?

Posting under several different names at different periods, in this case 'sabredriver', HGUSU and Migace to name but a few.

There are at least 2 maybe 3 other people who post regularly here under different aliases. Does that constitute "account spoofing" or is it only if it was done because of a previous banning? Just curious, as I know somebody who wants to create two different user names. They are a well known warbird "persona", but wish to post anonymously under one name in order to protect their reputation, while keeping their real name for other more "formal" posts.

I was going to point out to the "no more nicknames" crowd, that if nicks are no longer allowed.. some "inside" info or
"look here" info. etc. may dry up, that also appears to be the case here.

EDIT
I wasn't promoting condoning "Spoofing"..but if it was Kermit or Hinton, I'd have a don't ask don't tell policy.

[Mark_Pilkington]

.
Perhaps they are not obvious posts, but I cant recall ever seeing a hot scoop on Wix from an anonomous nick?

regards

Mark Pilkington

[warbird1]

.
Perhaps they are not obvious posts, but I cant recall ever seeing a hot scoop on Wix from an anonomous nick?

regards

Mark Pilkington

I can. There have been numerous hot scoops from non-traceable anonymous names.

[Mark_Pilkington]

.
Perhaps they are not obvious posts, but I cant recall ever seeing a hot scoop on Wix from an anonomous nick?

regards

Mark Pilkington

I can. There have been numerous hot scoops from non-traceable anonymous names.

Can you point one out for me?

smiles

Mark Pilkington

[retroaviation]

I recall some hints about some breaking news that was going to take place with a clunky ol' B-24 a few years back, by some fella that goes by "retroaviation."

Gary

[warbird1]

.
Perhaps they are not obvious posts, but I cant recall ever seeing a hot scoop on Wix from an anonomous nick?

regards

Mark Pilkington

I can. There have been numerous hot scoops from non-traceable anonymous names.

Can you point one out for me?

smiles

Mark Pilkington

The most recent one I can think of is the Wildcats in Texas thread:

http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/p ... ht=wildcat

[Mark_Pilkington]

.
I know "Tulio" is a nickname, but I wouldnt have thought posting of a public advertisement from Barnstormers that clearly flags the 3 wildcats in Texas and identifies the owner constitutes a "hot scoop" that would not have otherwise been reported here without protection of the posters identity through anonimity?

WARBIRD REBUILDER WANTED • JOB OFFERED • Looking for an experienced warbird rebuilder to rebuild 3 Wildcats in S. Texas. • Contact Mark Huffstutler - SIERRA INDUSTRIES, Owner - located Uvalde, TX USA • Telephone: 830-591-4750 . • Posted June 3, 2009

Those who have "inside" information and are willing to release it anonomously, but not wanting to release it under their own name and link the source to themselves publicly, could simply pass it onto another member to post it under their own name, who could/would keep his sources confidential.

Gossip and rumours dont need anonimity to spread, grapevines work very well in open, where as abuse and bad behaviour appears to thrive on it, and require it to hide behind.


Regards

Mark Pilkington

[warbird1]

.
I know "Tulio" is a nickname, but I wouldnt have thought posting of a public advertisement from Barnstormers that clearly flags the 3 wildcats in Texas and identifies the owner constitutes a "hot scoop" that would not have otherwise been reported here without protection of the posters identity through anonimity?

You are missing the point. The fact that the 3 Wildcats were for sale or who they went to were public information. An anonymous source confirmed that: one would be put on floats, and one would be a new Unlimited racer at Reno with radical modifications. That is HUGE news and something that has not left a small circle of people before. That "anonymous" source has two identities, BTW.

[Mark_Pilkington]

.
I know "Tulio" is a nickname, but I wouldnt have thought posting of a public advertisement from Barnstormers that clearly flags the 3 wildcats in Texas and identifies the owner constitutes a "hot scoop" that would not have otherwise been reported here without protection of the posters identity through anonimity?

You are missing the point. The fact that the 3 Wildcats were for sale or who they went to were public information. An anonymous source confirmed that: one would be put on floats, and one would be a new Unlimited racer at Reno with radical modifications. That is HUGE news and something that has not left a small circle of people before. That "anonymous" source has two identities, BTW.

Actually I would hope that the anonomous "hot scoop" of a rare Wildcat to be put on floats and another chopped into a Reno "hotrod" turns out to be inaccurate and simply an intentional windup of Wix.

But in anycase the same information could have been PM'd to another "named" poster who could have released it on their behalf without disclosing the source of his information. (Newspaper journalists happily report hot scoops under their own name, without disclosing the source of their anonomous tips)

I really dont think we would loose too much gossip due to the loss of anonimity, stories might be delayed in surfacing, but they would eventually find away to come out, those who feel an urgent need to post info anonomously will also freely discuss the same info at the hangar door or club house, and the listeners to those discussions will leak in here regardless.

regards

Mark Pilkington

[warbird1]

I really dont think we would loose too much gossip due to the loss of anonimity, stories might be delayed in surfacing, but they would eventually find away to come out, those who feel an urgent need to post info anonomously will also freely discuss the same info at the hangar door or club house, and the listeners to those discussions will leak in here regardless.

Perhaps true, but do you really want heresay? You know the old game of "telephone" where somebody hears something and tells somebody else that information and passes it along and by the time it reaches the 3rd or 4th person, all of the information is wrong. That is what will happen if people start reporting on "conversations" they heard. Would you not like to hear information/news from somebody closely involved in the project or perhaps one of the principals? Maybe certain people can't reveal themselves because of legal reasons (Indian 109 anyone?), or because they have signed NDA's (Non-Disclosure Agreements - i.e. all of Paul Allen's restorations), or perhaps because they could get in trouble by their boss because the information is not releaseable yet? Whatever the case, sometimes anonymity is a good thing for reasons not so nefarious as you seem to think.

I understand your point, Mark, but I totally disagree with it. It would be virtually impossible to make people post under their real names. It has many, many problems:

1) How enforceable would it be? Unless there is some kind of verification system, like sending a scan of an official document - driver's license, birth certificate, tax info I.D., etc, there is no way to ensure that people post under their real names. I'm sure that Scott, who barely has enough time to run this site, much less find willing Moderators, will want to waste a lot of time to run a verification service as a prerequisite to join.

2) Even if Scott did run an I.D. verification service prior to letting people post, if would weed out a LOT of casual people who's interest might have been sparked by an airshow, a touring B-17, an article on t.v. about W.W. II, etc. We would be putting out the spark of someone who could be the next Steve Hinton. Is that what we want, to make it difficult and a PITA for someone to join? The level of participation would DRAMATICALLY drop. Look what happened to the mustangsmustangs website when they tried to charge to join their website a few years ago.

3) Perhaps Scott could make people who want to join this forum, pay via a credit card or paypal. That would be an easy way to make sure people use their real names, right? The rule might be that the poster's name would have to match what is on the credit card. But again, see issue #2. Do we want to limit this forum and perhaps weed out younger people who have no credit cards or money or people who don't want to go to the hassle? In addition, what if somebody use's their wives'/husbands'/boy/girl/friend's card? If their last names are not the same, they just circumvented the "real name" rule for the forum. What if somebody used a "business" credit card without their name? Again, lots of problems with this - not a solution, IMO.

4) The only way around not having a verification service, would be to make this site an invitation only forum. Again, see issue #2. The warbird movement needs supporters, not an exclusive men's aviation club reminiscent of the CAF of the 70's and 80's.

The only solution that I see is for Scott to put in some "hard-ass" anonymous Moderators who will actually enforce ALL of the rules and not give any preferential or selective enforcement to anyone. When people start "dropping like flies" and they get publicly announced for their temporary bannings and suspensions, the rule-breakers will come to their knees and all of our problems will be solved.

[Tulio]

.
I know "Tulio" is a nickname, but I wouldnt have thought posting of a public advertisement from Barnstormers that clearly flags the 3 wildcats in Texas and identifies the owner constitutes a "hot scoop" that would not have otherwise been reported here without protection of the posters identity through anonimity? Mark Pilkington

You are mistaken, Mark.

Tulio is my name, and Soto is my last name.

I have always posted under my name.

EDITED:

For the record, I was not posting any scoops on behalf of anyone. I found the information on Barnstormers, and the same as I have done through the years, thought that the information would be of interest to the WIXers, and started the thread.

I do not know the owner of the Wildcats, I do not know anything about them, I have never seen them, and I have no contact whatsoever, with the provider of the anonymous information.


Saludos,


Tulio

[Mark_Pilkington]

Perhaps true, but do you really want heresay? You know the old game of "telephone" where somebody hears something and tells somebody else that information and passes it along and by the time it reaches the 3rd or 4th person, all of the information is wrong. That is what will happen if people start reporting on "conversations" they heard. Would you not like to hear information/news from somebody closely involved in the project or perhaps one of the principals? Maybe certain people can't reveal themselves because of legal reasons (Indian 109 anyone?), or because they have signed NDA's (Non-Disclosure Agreements - i.e. all of Paul Allen's restorations), or perhaps because they could get in trouble by their boss because the information is not releaseable yet? Whatever the case, sometimes anonymity is a good thing for reasons not so nefarious as you seem to think.

If the post is anonomous I'm afraid I have little confidence it really is one of the principals or someone close to the project in anycase, and have no way is knowing if it isnt just "heresay"?

Its nice to read, but I dont place much reliance on it until alternative sources confirm the information, or pics start showing up.

There have been plenty of "walter mitty" announcements of sunken spitfires with floats, or Libyan Spitfires being discovered that turned out to be "hot air", not "hot scoops".

Real projects will eventually filter out through the cracks in the hangar door into these forums, magazines etc even if the principals do try to lock down or gag the staff.

If someone close to the project have signed NDA's or risk getting into trouble from their boss for releasing the information wont the "boss" be suspicious of the likely source in anycase, once posts on WIX start popping up?

I recently confided with someone over a planned recovery that was then posted unintentionally, and prematurely on the net.

I knew its source due to the very limited number of people in the know, and requested it be urgently deleted, if secrecy is required its usually fairly easy to identify the leak, even better , if secrecy is required limit the number of people in the know in the first place.

As I said if someone close to a project feels a need to compromise the confidentiality they have been asked to keep, and therefore release the details without identifying themselves as the source, they can simply pass the information onto someone else to post openly without disclosing the source.

In fact the anonomous sources could simply open an anonomous hotmail account and email the details to Scott or the Mods and have a hot scoop post or whole section full of the latest confidential details. "Heard at the Hangar Door"

There are very few of those with anonomous nicks here that are delivering "inside" or "confidential" hot scoops as a reason to maintain the arrangement when other processes can allow the information to be openly delivered?

In regards to policing the real names, I dont propose that birth certificates need to be produced to join, but if someone is going to post here, why not require them to place their real name at the bottom of their posts, nicknames like JDK were supported by Jame's real name at the bottom of each post.

Yes it might all be too hard but thats no reason not to try?

My simple point echo's the advice any lawyer will give you - "dont sign your name to anything you have'nt read through fully twice"

We shouldnt post anything here until we have read it through fully twice, and are happy to place our "real name" underneath it and own the consequences.


If someone is going to go out of their way to register intentionally under a false "real" name, its probably indicative of their future motives and intentions in any case, and their actions will probably be exposed relatively quickly, and I understand some forum managers check IP addresses on some suspicious new registrations to ensure banned members dont re-register?



In the end its Scotts call, I am happy to abide by Scotts rules what ever they are, he pays the bills, but your proposal of a credit card paid subscription is something I would support, allow free browsing of the forums by visitors, but require a paid membership and real name to post, it would soon weed out phantom identities etc and ensure Scott is compenstated for his efforts.

Perhaps if we paid for the right to post here, we would value that "right", and realise it is in fact a "priviledge".

In relation to hard ass Mods, I felt JDK was achieving that, and look at the crap he copped for his efforts, and the belated support we all gave him when it was too late!

(Tulio - I was simply using you as an example of a person in that post not fully identifying yourself by your full name, but not suggesting you do so for false reasons, many of the nicknames used here do have some link to the persons realname or are clearly associated with themselves in some way. On the otherhand "flyingheritage" was a nick used by a banned member who had been repremanded under at least 3 other nicks that I was aware of)

Its clear that there are differing views to all this, and theres little point in continuing the volley of debate, lets simply "agree to disagree" and let Scott and the Mods manage the place (as Scott chooses) with all of our strong support, and encourage everyone (including ourselves) to improve their behaviour, and not accept crap behaviour by others.


Regards

Mark Pilkington

[warbird1]

If the post is anonomous I'm afraid I have little confidence it really is one of the principals or someone close to the project in anycase, and have no way is knowing if it isnt just "heresay"?

Its nice to read, but I dont place much reliance on it until alternative sources confirm the information, or pics start showing up.

There have been plenty of "walter mitty" announcements of sunken spitfires with floats, or Libyan Spitfires being discovered that turned out to be "hot air", not "hot scoops".

Yes, it is anonymous, but that poster has 1) posted under another identity previously here at WIX, so his background, what he does, and his identity have been verified by several people. Yes, he is anonymous under his "new" identity, but not his old one. He also posts on at least one other aviation forum, so his background has been "vetted", if you will. He is VERY close to the source and I believe what he writes here. This fact is not readily apparent to the casual observer, though, so unless one has read virtually every post here in the last 5 years, that might be difficult to determine for the casual reader of WIX. In addition to this, if you "read between the lines", Gary Austin PM'ed the poster to inquire about the possibility of becoming the head project manager for the Wildcats. This is another facet which lends credence to the whole issue.

Your comparison of the Wildcat info to the "walter mitty" announcement of "sunken Spitfires", etc. is not a valid one. Someone buying 3 Wildcats from a publicly known sale is a LOT more credible than your scenario. You are comparing apples to oranges - no comparison whatsoever. Are you honestly saying that someone buying those 3 Wildcats with the stated intentions is just as unbelievable as "sunken Spitfires" or Libyan Spitfires? To me, the two don't compare at all.

If someone is going to go out of their way to register intentionally under a false "real" name, its probably indicative of their future motives and intentions in any case, and their actions will probably be exposed relatively quickly, and I understand some forum managers check IP addresses on some suspicious new registrations to ensure banned members dont re-register?

Posting under a false "real" name is not necessarily indicative of future suspicious motives. See my post above as to reasons why that is the case. Also, let's assume that Steve Hinton or Kermit Weeks, etc., wants to join our discussion here. Let's face it, they are warbird celebrities. Why would they want us to invade their privacy and possibly besiege them with loads of PM's that they don't want to answer? As an aside, the real, authentic, Bob Hoover registered and posted only once under his real name on another aviation forum that I frequented. Why did he leave after only one post? Could it possibly be that he was "hounded" with PM's and requests and didn't want to deal with it? Also, a little known fact - Steve Hinton did post once on one of the previous incarnations of WIX under his real name. It could have been on the old WWW forum, I don't remember, as it was long ago. He sure left quickly after that one post. I wonder why? Posting under an alias would solve all of those privacy issues for our famous warbird celebrities.

Regarding the checking of I.P. addresses to check previously banned members - well that's an admirable thought, but unfortunately it is easy to defeat. High speed cable/DSL use dynamic I.P.'s so it's fairly easy to change one's I.P. Also, there are plenty of free proxy servers available which can disguise one's I.P. as well. Any layman with about 5 minutes of googling can figure that one out.

In relation to hard ass Mods, I felt JDK was achieving that, and look at the crap he copped for his efforts, and the belated support we all gave him when it was too late!

I agree with you. We need hard ass Mods who are not afraid to enforce the rules even though it might end up pissing everyone off. Yet, another reason why they should be anonymous, that way, repercussions don't fall back on the Mods. Doing this anonymously would have prevented JDK from leaving, IMO.

Its clear that there are differing views to all this, and theres little point in continuing the volley of debate, lets simply "agree to disagree" and let Scott and the Mods manage the place (as Scott chooses) with all of our strong support, and encourage everyone (including ourselves) to improve their behaviour, and not accept crap behaviour by others.

Yes, there are differing viewpoints on this, but that is a good thing! A nice, healthy, respectful debate is never a bad thing. The fact that we are discussing more perspectives can do nothing but give Scott information that he needs to decide on the future direction of this forum. Notice, that we have had a nice discussion, nothing has gotten personal, no threats, nothing - that is the way all "volleys" should be here. Whatever the outcome, I'm sure we all agree that: 1) it's Scott's forum, he decides the rules, he decides how this place operates, 2) whatever final decision Scott makes, we all support him 100%.

Great discussion, Mark, thanks for taking the time to participate in it with me and yes, I agree to disagree!

[Mark_Pilkington]

Yes, it is anonymous, but that poster has 1) posted under another identity previously here at WIX, so his background, what he does, and his identity have been verified by several people. Yes, he is anonymous under his "new" identity, but not his old one. He also posts on at least one other aviation forum, so his background has been "vetted", if you will. He is VERY close to the source and I believe what he writes here. This fact is not readily apparent to the casual observer, though, so unless one has read virtually every post here in the last 5 years, that might be difficult to determine for the casual reader of WIX.

Obviously if some people "know" the anonomous poster's background and he has been "verified" he's not "really" anonomous? especially if you can identify him even under his "new" identity? - it would really seem to make the whole "anonomous" status questionable would'nt it, if lots of people can vett and identify him other than casual readers?

Other than protecting a celebrity poster such as Kermit Weeks from being pestered for autographs as you point out, the other reasons you put forward for anomonimity such as protecting his job with the owner etc would seem to evaporate if lots of the regulars can actually identify him?

In addition to this, if you "read between the lines", Gary Austin PM'ed the poster to inquire about the possibility of becoming the head project manager for the Wildcats. This is another facet which lends credence to the whole issue.

Yes I noted that, and wish Gary luck with that opportunity, but that doesnt make me need to rely on the "hot scoop"'s accuracy or credibility?

I dont actually have a need to rely on it, or give it credence, its not an official announcement, its an anonomous post.

Your comparison of the Wildcat info to the "walter mitty" announcement of "sunken Spitfires", etc. is not a valid one. Someone buying 3 Wildcats from a publicly known sale is a LOT more credible than your scenario. You are comparing apples to oranges - no comparison whatsoever. Are you honestly saying that someone buying those 3 Wildcats with the stated intentions is just as unbelievable as "sunken Spitfires" or Libyan Spitfires? To me, the two don't compare at all.

I'm not sure I made such a comparison, I simply indicated that an anonomous "announcement" doesnt particularly evidence anything to me at all, as I said they are interesting to read, but I take them with a grain of salt until other more concrete sources of information, and evidence such as photos arrive.

A "truely" anonomous "hot scoop" is by its anonominity not much more than gossip and rumour.

I'm not doubting the purchase of the 3 Wildcats, thats proven by the public advertisement in Barnstormers, I havent as yet made a cast iron link between the confirmed public purchase and the anonomous poster's advice of their fate.

I did lament the apparant intention to put one on floats and create a Reno Hot rod from another, and hoped that this was just a wind-up of Wix, but thats not me doubting it, just regreting it, as it is news I wouldnt greet or welcome even if provided by someone posting with birth certificate and statutory declarations to their identity and access to the hot scoop, as I would much prefer all three Wildcats be restored to their historical configurations.

The point I did make, is that there have been many walter mitty annoucements over the years, and "anonomous" announcers (not ones where half the forum population nods and winks to the "known" identity) do not really create much credence with me.

Obviously you are placing strong credence from the underlying known identity you recognise underneath this anonomous nick, hence I think you are comparing apples to oranges in this debate, and not really presenting this as a truelly "anonomous" example.

It is possible to have a vigourous and even "adversarial" debate in forums when you respect the right of the other person to have an opposing opinion, and "attack" (in the true spirit of debating) someones "argument" politely without resorting to simply "arguing", and in all cases debate the opinions, rather than "attack" the person.

We ALL need to set higher standards for ourselves and others, particularly as examples to those who resort to bad behaviour.

I always enjoy a good debate on these forums, and always enjoy reading sensible and interesting posts - even from anonomous posters, and enjoy learning from those experiences.

Thanks for the stimulating exchange warbird1, I would thank you more personally, but I dont know your real name to do so?

perhaps I should just call you Kermit for short

smiles

Mark Pilkington