>Yes, when I merge an account, we save everything. 15 pages were collected with strong evidences on this one. But, note also that the T & C of the site allows us to do that or any other administration purposes as we see fit. It is up to the member to decide to use the site based on his or her acceptance of those terms. If it the same thing with Facebook. They close accounts, and a lot of them, everyday. Nobody can sue them because it is part of the agreement of the site. The same applies here.
>
>This is the same old story everytime. People are mad if there is no action being taken to resolve an issue. Then, once we do, we have 50% against us, the same 50% that are friends with the member involved in the situation. There is no win win situation on that. Look back in 2001. I think it was clear enough that two individuals used the site to debate, way over was is being allowed in the Terms & Conditions of the site. For weeks, I had members on my back treatening me to stop their subscription, leave the site and ask for ban procedures againts the individuals. Then, when we did it, even with all the public evidences that was online, all their friends were mad at us because, as friend, I guess we tend to believe that our "said" friend is as good as we are, as each individual usually thinks about himself or herself as a clean person.
>
>As for other concerns you expressed in your reply, as mentioned before, depending on the magnitude of the situation, there could be or not the possibility of allowing the member to express himself. I did allow it for 48 hours online however. It did not happen.


The concern with that, is it was never directed to Kevin's account was it? Did you ever address any message, public or private, to Kevin? You previously stated no. If Kevin is not Grover, he would have no reason to respond to a message directed to "Grover."


>But, especially, concerning the fact that this wasn't the first time the individual was involved in such issues, tell me, how many chances do you want me to give them, "them" used as a general terminology to all those who keep causing trouble.
>
>Do you really think that after repetitive involvments at bypassing our Terms & Conditions that I would proceed with a 1-2-3 step to exchange emails, phone calls and such to try to let the member know. I had enough of that behavior. I have tolerated those activities far more than what it should have been. If it would have to be done again, I would have not allowed the reinstatement of that account two years ago. In general, on situations like that, there could be immediate banishment procedure. This is all based on the level of magnitude of the situation. I have seen that before. Hackers tried to bring our site down. Some members went really too far on their first attempt at jeopardizing the site. In those cases, there was no negotiate possible. There can be immediate procedure.
>
>The fact that we can contact individuals based on their actions is a favor that was allowed to them a few times. The site is clear about it. There are rules. If someone breaks them, immediate account closing procedure may apply.


Isn't the difference here that the discussion in the past was under their original accounts? It has NOTHING to do with "friends." My concern with the procedures you have followed due to Grover's posts have absolutely nothing to do with Kevin as an individual (although he is the member who has had messages merged into his account this time). It has to do with ethics and what is right and what is wrong.

I have stated numerous times that I agree that you, as owner, have the right to ban anyone at any time for any reason you choose. You do not even have to state any reason why. My concern is with the merging of the accounts without running the algorithm against all members and checking for the same ip under a different account. My entire concern is with your statement above (emphasis mine). You are putting messages posted under one account into another when there is the possibility others may fit the same result set of your algorithm. Until you run the algorithm against all members, you do not know if that is the case. A member monitoring Grover's messages or the thread and then when notified, logging in or refreshing the UT to read those messages, would fit the same result set as Kevin would it not? Did other members do that as well? If you say that yes, you ran the same algorithm against all members and verified the same ip address as Grover was not used as another member as well (it may not prove another user was Grover due to ip spoofing, but it could rule out Kevin), then I will take your word for it.

Now that you have made the claim (in bold above) that you will, at your discretion, merge accounts, I will need to decide if I, as a member of this site, am willing to risk being attached to messages I did not post in the future at your discretion. That is not something that I ever felt it was necessary to be concerned about in the past.