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

[24681012]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[RabC]

And all this is related to RR how?

 

[ski21]

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]

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.

 

[Sumo]

@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?

 

[ski21]

Thank you, I am not banned from that part and it is very useful so thank you for pointing me in that direction.