Banned from RM site for shared IP address? Any advice?

24681012

Badgeman
Hi
My daughter and I have both been banned from the RM site for 2 months for sharing an IP address? I don't understand what we have done wrong. She had 3 addresses because she had problems logging in but had told @Ninja_Stoker that and asked him to cancel 2 a while back. I don't think either of us posted anything offensive.
Can anyone familiar with these forums explain what the problem is? Thank you.
 

Sumo

War Hero
On the home page, bottom right hand corner, there is a contact option use that to speak to the administrator's, they may be able to help or explain.
 

24681012

Badgeman
Thanks sumo I just tried that but it wouldn't accept my answers to the captcha question after 4 attempts and just won't send my message,- rifle for the RM = SA80?
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
From what I gather the suspension wasn't for multiple accounts, it was allegedly persistent trolling to provoke negative reactions about females joining the Royal Marines. This has been remarked upon by a good number of users enquiring about the specific motive behind this aggressive campaign over a lengthy period.

It is extremely rare for users to be suspended on this particular independent site, as it aims to educate and assist potential Royal Marines, but that judgement is left to the individuals concerned.

The multi user detector systems also identify the device used to log-in, the browser and the cookies for different accounts logged-in from the same or several devices within a specified time period. It's accepted people share ip addresses, 4G mobile, home broadband, hotspots and wifi networks not to mention the same pc, laptop or tablet but it is less common for them to use the same mobile devices within very short timescales for different accounts also.

Clearly the moderator's patience wore out unfortunately.
 

24681012

Badgeman
From what I gather the suspension wasn't for multiple accounts, it was allegedly persistent trolling to provoke negative reactions about females joining the Royal Marines. This has been remarked upon by a good number of users enquiring about the specific motive behind this aggressive campaign over a lengthy period.

It is extremely rare for users to be suspended on this particular independent site, as it aims to educate and assist potential Royal Marines, but that judgement is left to the individuals concerned.

The multi user detector systems also identify the device used to log-in, the browser and the cookies for different accounts logged-in from the same or several devices within a specified time period. It's accepted people share ip addresses, 4G mobile, home broadband, hotspots and wifi networks not to mention the same pc, laptop or tablet but it is less common for them to use the same mobile devices within very short timescales for different accounts also.

Clearly the moderator's patience wore out unfortunately.
From what I gather the suspension wasn't for multiple accounts, it was allegedly persistent trolling to provoke negative reactions about females joining the Royal Marines. This has been remarked upon by a good number of users enquiring about the specific motive behind this aggressive campaign over a lengthy period.

It is extremely rare for users to be suspended on this particular independent site, as it aims to educate and assist potential Royal Marines, but that judgement is left to the individuals concerned.

The multi user detector systems also identify the device used to log-in, the browser and the cookies for different accounts logged-in from the same or several devices within a specified time period. It's accepted people share ip addresses, 4G mobile, home broadband, hotspots and wifi networks not to mention the same pc, laptop or tablet but it is less common for them to use the same mobile devices within very short timescales for different accounts also.

Clearly the moderator's patience wore out unfortunately.
This was a robust debate about women on the front line from a parent and daughter to other members on the forum who were debating with considerably more aggression. A few weeks ago the thread was down and I asked you whether it was because of anything I said, because i believe that i have been extremely polite, and you replied that it was more from the red blooded males defending their beloved corps. Fair enough.
The criticisms expressed on the forum were less about the debate, more anger that I would not publicly state any personal details about where my child was in the recruitment process. After we were taken off , with no warning, established members of the site continued to ask my daughter to explain herself and as she was unable to post, it would have appeared that the thread was being trolled.
The RM has opened to women. She is interested in applying. Another girl on the site has expressed that some comments on the thread are 'disgusting'. Women's voices on the site are few and far between, shutting them down is a strange response. You can make any background check you want, or ask for any personal information by pm to either of us. I had already offered to post no more on the thread and if you had wanted to shut us out of the debate. You need only have asked. She uses the site for all the training questions and it is interesting for any parent who has a son or daughter applying. The debate in our house rages strongly given the fact that she has sisters with strong views on equality and female rights. I genuinely do not understand how you can have a robust debate when you exclude the minority of voices to a site in a branch which has just been opened to women. This is not an agenda, it is a 19 year old applicant and I am her parent ( who would much prefer her to go for a different branch incidentally, for all the good reasons stated on the forum). I would have preferred to have this conversation privately, but you chose to reply in public. I am asking you to reconsider the ban and we will abide by any restrictions you choose to make.​
 

24681012

Badgeman
This was a robust debate about women on the front line from a parent and daughter to other members on the forum who were debating with considerably more aggression. A few weeks ago the thread was down and I asked you whether it was because of anything I said, because i believe that i have been extremely polite, and you replied that it was more from the red blooded males defending their beloved corps. Fair enough.
The criticisms expressed on the forum were less about the debate, more anger that I would not publicly state any personal details about where my child was in the recruitment process. After we were taken off , with no warning, established members of the site continued to ask my daughter to explain herself and as she was unable to post, it would have appeared that the thread was being trolled.
The RM has opened to women. She is interested in applying. Another girl on the site has expressed that some comments on the thread are 'disgusting'. Women's voices on the site are few and far between, shutting them down is a strange response. You can make any background check you want, or ask for any personal information by pm to either of us. I had already offered to post no more on the thread and if you had wanted to shut us out of the debate. You need only have asked. She uses the site for all the training questions and it is interesting for any parent who has a son or daughter applying. The debate in our house rages strongly given the fact that she has sisters with strong views on equality and female rights. I genuinely do not understand how you can have a robust debate when you exclude the minority of voices to a site in a branch which has just been opened to women. This is not an agenda, it is a 19 year old applicant and I am her parent ( who would much prefer her to go for a different branch incidentally, for all the good reasons stated on the forum). I would have preferred to have this conversation privately, but you chose to reply in public. I am asking you to reconsider the ban and we will abide by any restrictions you choose to make.​
PS the ban as it comes up on the site states for multi user IP s . After trying to use the contact us as suggested by sumo, it changed to banned for starting new accounts to avoid a ban, which I also do not understand, as I wrote from my account page.
 

ski21

Newbie
As the daughter in question. It relates because the rm are part of the navy. I have now been banned from a site which was incredibly useful to my application. And an accusation of "alleged trolling to provoke a negative reaction towards females" shocks me as over a period of 6 months I posted 3 times. I am a women who just expressed her opinion politely. And an aggressive campaign? Really? It was just an opposing view point brought about in a very considerate manor as against The replies which I would argue as far more aggressive/accusatory.
I have also pm @Ninja_Stoker to explain the confusion over accounts. Who has ignored me, therefore I presume you still believe me to be some alter ego of my mother.
 

janner

MIA
Book Reviewer
It has no bearing on RR which is not an RM site. If your complaint is with a different site keep your comments on that site. This is an independant site for those with an interest in the Royal Navy.
 
Last edited:

Sumo

War Hero
@ski21 as you can see you are not banned from this part of RR, there is a Royal Marine section under forums or is that where you are banned from?
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
MoD_RSS Weston-Super-Mare restaurateur banned from managing companies MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Computer traders banned for selling counterfeit goods MoD News 0
MoD_RSS North London restaurateur banned for under-declaring tax MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Used tractor salesman banned after misleading customers MoD News 0
A Am I banned from joining the navy? Joining the Royal Navy 19
MoD_RSS Second-hand car dealers banned for 14 years MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Pension investment advisor banned MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Investment bosses banned for 29 years MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Health supplements bosses banned for 21 years MoD News 0
MoD_RSS North West London restaurateur banned for under-declaring income MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Mother banned for allowing disqualified son to run company MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Solicitor banned after illicitly securing millions from investors MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Walsall fast food boss banned for failing to maintain books MoD News 0
MoD_RSS North London Immigration Adviser banned indefinitely. MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Portsmouth restaurateur banned for tax offences MoD News 0
D Am I banned from joining the Navy forever? Please help me :) Joining the Royal Navy 18
MoD_RSS Poole restaurateurs banned for tax offences MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Edinburgh investment boss banned for decade MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Telecommunications boss banned for breaching regulations MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Cambridgeshire care home boss banned for 4 years MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Bogus law firm boss banned for a decade MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Maulden family banned after putting themselves ahead of creditors MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Currency trading boss banned after abusing clients’ funds MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Multi-million-pound pension liberation bosses banned for 34 years MoD News 0
MoD_RSS South East car mechanic banned for trading while insolvent MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Waste giant forced to pay over £500,000 for exporting banned waste MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Wolverhampton cash and carry boss banned for 8 years MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Restaurateur banned for 9 years after concealing tax owed to HMRC MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Directors banned for dishonestly securing £975,000 of credit MoD News 0
MoD_RSS CMA directs Barclays to fix banned banking practices MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Ilford boss banned over missing IT equipment MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Bolton charity boss banned for causing Lifeline Project to sink MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Diamond trader banned for falsifying sales invoices MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Travel agency boss banned following unexplained company payments MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Pub landlord banned for submitting inaccurate tax returns MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Investment boss banned after misappropriating client's £800,000 MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Luton coach boss banned for hiding fleet MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Ethical directors banned after withdrawing millions in contested tax scheme MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Waste boss banned for breaching environmental legislation MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Southend director banned for transferring assets to father-in-law MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Liverpool Chinatown contractor banned from running businesses MoD News 0
MoD_RSS News story: Hizballah banned in the UK MoD News 0
MoD_RSS News story: Hizballah to be banned alongside other terrorist organisations MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Not-for-profit music enterprise boss banned for second time MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Aberdeen car dealer banned for seven years MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Market researcher banned for thousands of unregulated marketing calls MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Glasgow boss banned for flouting director requirements MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Financial Services bosses banned for trading while insolvent MoD News 0
MoD_RSS Press release: Property developer behind incomplete football stadium banned MoD News 0
MoD_RSS News story: Pensions cold-calling banned MoD News 0
Similar threads


















































Latest Threads

New Posts

Top