posted on Jul, 1 2008 @ 03:01 AM
For the purpose of this exercise, let us consider a minor conspiracy. And even though we call it a conspiracy, perhaps, it is better defined as a
game, a challenge, an experiment in the mind of the perpetrator. Maybe it is nothing more than the proof that person needs to reaffirm his/her belief
that he/she is indeed smarter than all of us.
At any rate, let's say you are looking over the recent posts and discover a thread where a new poster makes a claim and promises more information to
You recognize the similarity of this thread to a past thread. And other posters point out the similarities of the two threads as well. In most cases,
when the information does not follow, we agree the poster was pranking, hoaxing, leading us on, pulling our string, whatever you want to call it.
Hypothetically, you come across evidence this hoaxer/prankster/troll is, in reality, a member who had been here for some time. And that he/she is
signing up with a new sock puppet each time to post these threads, if for no other reason then to prove to himself/herself, or friends, that they can
write a meaningless post that garners a lot of attention and massages their ego.
Would you take it personally?
Would it offend you to know you were somebody's experiment?
Would you need to validate the conclusions you have drawn?
Now, you just can't go ask the member since that person is not likely to admit to posting under a sock puppet.
Secondly, you don't want to make an accusatory post calling the member out since that will more than likely lead to an argument, if anywhere.
Finally, you don't want to involve the mods or admin since we're playing in the real world where there are none.
The hard question is: What do you do? And is it possible to expose this person?
My first thought was to visit all the posts taking snippets which were comparable to those of the sock puppets and making a new post of the striking
similarity of the language. But is that enough to prove anything?
Is proof impossible in this case?