The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Share

    hemlock
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 5005
    Registration date : 2009-06-20

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by hemlock on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:12 am

    wprager wrote:
    rooneypoo wrote:I just re-checked the original email Hemlock sent me, Wprager:

    Under one IP, there is 1 Guest, 5 Notch aliases, CR, and SS.

    What are the 5 Notch aliases? I could only find 4.

    The ones you listed above and 4077notch

    rooneypoo
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 7429
    Registration date : 2008-08-11

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by rooneypoo on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:23 am

    wprager wrote:
    rooneypoo wrote:I just re-checked the original email Hemlock sent me, Wprager:

    Under one IP, there is 1 Guest, 5 Notch aliases, CR, and SS.

    What are the 5 Notch aliases? I could only find 4.

    This is what I have:

    IP address for this post
    99.250.69.175 [ 8 Posts ] [ Look up IP address ]
    Users posting from this IP address
    Guest [ 547 Posts ] Find all posts by Guest
    notch77 [ 10 Posts ] Find all posts by notch77
    notch_4077 [ 8 Posts ] Find all posts by notch_4077
    4077notch [ 7 Posts ] Find all posts by 4077notch
    notch4077 [ 3 Posts ] Find all posts by notch4077
    notch [ 2 Posts ] Find all posts by notch
    Straight Shooter [ 1 Post ] Find all posts by Straight Shooter
    CockRoche [ 1 Post ] Find all posts by CockRoche

    And I count 5 Notch aliases, plus guest, pus CR & SS. If I had to guess, the "Guest" account is probably Cloverleaf or one of the deleted Notch accounts, but that's just a guess.


    Last edited by rooneypoo on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:34 am; edited 2 times in total

    rooneypoo
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 7429
    Registration date : 2008-08-11

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by rooneypoo on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:24 am

    wprager wrote:
    NEELY wrote:
    wprager wrote:By the way, when did Neely ever come out and say he knew the real Roche?

    Never said I knew him, I said he was an instructor at a camp I was at in 97.

    Rooney said you knew him, earlier.

    Knew him, went to camp with him. All I know is N4L asked a pretty simple question that CR couldn't answer, & which the real Roche should have been able to answer.
    avatar
    rooneypoo
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 7429
    Age : 38
    Location : Ottawa
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-08-11

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by rooneypoo on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:36 am

    asq2 wrote:Even if Roche is Notch, so what?

    So you'd be OK if I started pretending I was Martin Brodeur tomorrow? I could create a new account for it and everything.

    Where does it end?
    avatar
    asq2
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 7179
    Favorite Team : Detroit
    Registration date : 2008-08-05

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by asq2 on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:52 am

    rooneypoo wrote:
    asq2 wrote:Even if Roche is Notch, so what?

    So you'd be OK if I started pretending I was Martin Brodeur tomorrow? I could create a new account for it and everything.

    Where does it end?

    Isn't that a bit reductio ad absurdem?

    That is, granted, an interesting point you raised up. I don't recall the specifics but I remember Neely being pissed that Roche was saying he was someone Neely didn't think he is. Did that really affect the posts he made, though? Analyzing a goalie under a false name is not the same as spreading rumours under the name Bob McKenzie or something in terms of the inconveniencing of other members. I don't really care who he says he was (I'd forgotten about it, actually). Tukker was a great poster, but I don't think we gave him more credence because he was an ex-NHLer rather than just reading what he posted.

    That is a better reason to ban him and I suppose influenced by the whole IP scenario, though. But surely there could have been less extreme solutions.

    EDIT: Also I still feel like this should have been the reason given at the outset. Re-reading the thread I did see you said it, but you didn't make the decision. It seems to me that the decision was made almost entirely out of the fact that we think/discovered he was Notch, and now we're trying to come up with other reasons. Not sure I'm comfortable with doing something like this and then thinking up ways to justify it later, though I suppose a just action is a just action.
    avatar
    wprager
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Number of posts : 48173
    Age : 56
    Location : Kanata
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-08-05

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by wprager on Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:37 am

    rooneypoo wrote:
    wprager wrote:
    rooneypoo wrote:I just re-checked the original email Hemlock sent me, Wprager:

    Under one IP, there is 1 Guest, 5 Notch aliases, CR, and SS.

    What are the 5 Notch aliases? I could only find 4.

    This is what I have:

    IP address for this post
    99.250.69.175 [ 8 Posts ] [ Look up IP address ]
    Users posting from this IP address
    Guest [ 547 Posts ] Find all posts by Guest
    notch77 [ 10 Posts ] Find all posts by notch77
    notch_4077 [ 8 Posts ] Find all posts by notch_4077
    4077notch [ 7 Posts ] Find all posts by 4077notch
    notch4077 [ 3 Posts ] Find all posts by notch4077
    notch [ 2 Posts ] Find all posts by notch
    Straight Shooter [ 1 Post ] Find all posts by Straight Shooter
    CockRoche [ 1 Post ] Find all posts by CockRoche

    And I count 5 Notch aliases, plus guest, pus CR & SS. If I had to guess, the "Guest" account is probably Cloverleaf or one of the deleted Notch accounts, but that's just a guess.

    Sorry, I searched for notch* and not *notch* so I only found 4 of them. "Guest" could be one of many, but is most likely one (or more) of Notch's deleted accounts.

    Yet, that particular address is in Wichita, not Markham. The Markham one(s) are actually close to Vaughn than Markham, and are used infrequently. Another series of IP addresses (again, these were used by CR), are very close to the UofT, which is what got me thinking about public shared-access places in the first place.

    The more I look at all this the more it looks like the IP addresses are pretty much messed up. Looking at my own set of IP addresses used, the sum total of posts from each IP adds up to 13,088 which is quite a few shy of my post count. Another user (don't remember who) had a post total adding up to over something more than SD's count. Messed up or not well understood.


    _________________
    Hey, I don't have all the answers. In life, to be honest, I've failed as much as I have succeeded. But I love my wife. I love my life. And I wish you my kind of success.
    - Dicky Fox
    avatar
    wprager
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Number of posts : 48173
    Age : 56
    Location : Kanata
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-08-05

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by wprager on Sun Mar 06, 2011 6:46 am

    Not Tukker. Tuk Tuk is a 17-year-old songwriter. The one you're thinking of is someone else. I forgot who, though.


    _________________
    Hey, I don't have all the answers. In life, to be honest, I've failed as much as I have succeeded. But I love my wife. I love my life. And I wish you my kind of success.
    - Dicky Fox
    avatar
    shabbs
    Hall of Famer
    Hall of Famer

    Number of posts : 31416
    Location : I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome I am.
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-08-12

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by shabbs on Sun Mar 06, 2011 8:25 am

    wprager wrote:
    shabbs wrote:
    Dash wrote:I can't tell if you are trying to argue for or against the notion that Notch and Roche are or are not one in the same?
    Heh. I'm just pointing out that IP addresses can be manipulated...

    Yes, they can.

    Now see if you can manipulate it to be the same as mine.

    ETA: This is the IP address for this post:
    99.224.124.213 [ CPE001b11251e39-CM0012c9daeb78.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com ]
    That would be a neat trick...

    avatar
    Number Twenty Nine
    Veteran
    Veteran

    Number of posts : 1680
    Age : 95
    Location : Forth Worth, Texas
    Favorite Team : Dallas
    Registration date : 2008-08-06

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by Number Twenty Nine on Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:03 am

    asq2 wrote:
    rooneypoo wrote:
    asq2 wrote:Even if Roche is Notch, so what?

    So you'd be OK if I started pretending I was Martin Brodeur tomorrow? I could create a new account for it and everything.

    Where does it end?

    Isn't that a bit reductio ad absurdem?

    That is, granted, an interesting point you raised up. I don't recall the specifics but I remember Neely being pissed that Roche was saying he was someone Neely didn't think he is. Did that really affect the posts he made, though? Analyzing a goalie under a false name is not the same as spreading rumours under the name Bob McKenzie or something in terms of the inconveniencing of other members. I don't really care who he says he was (I'd forgotten about it, actually). Tukker was a great poster, but I don't think we gave him more credence because he was an ex-NHLer rather than just reading what he posted.

    That is a better reason to ban him and I suppose influenced by the whole IP scenario, though. But surely there could have been less extreme solutions.

    EDIT: Also I still feel like this should have been the reason given at the outset. Re-reading the thread I did see you said it, but you didn't make the decision. It seems to me that the decision was made almost entirely out of the fact that we think/discovered he was Notch, and now we're trying to come up with other reasons. Not sure I'm comfortable with doing something like this and then thinking up ways to justify it later, though I suppose a just action is a just action.

    The last edit is what I get out of this as well.
    avatar
    SeawaySensFan
    Franchise Player
    Franchise Player

    Number of posts : 24783
    Age : 45
    Location : Cornwall, ON
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-12-02

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by SeawaySensFan on Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:23 am

    How's the investigation coming along?
    avatar
    shabbs
    Hall of Famer
    Hall of Famer

    Number of posts : 31416
    Location : I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome I am.
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-08-12

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by shabbs on Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:27 am

    SeawaySensFan wrote:How's the investigation coming along?

    avatar
    SeawaySensFan
    Franchise Player
    Franchise Player

    Number of posts : 24783
    Age : 45
    Location : Cornwall, ON
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-12-02

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by SeawaySensFan on Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:43 am

    shabbs wrote:
    SeawaySensFan wrote:How's the investigation coming along?


    I KNEW IT!!! Dancing
    avatar
    asq2
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 7179
    Favorite Team : Detroit
    Registration date : 2008-08-05

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by asq2 on Sun Mar 06, 2011 11:52 am

    wprager wrote:Not Tukker. Tuk Tuk is a 17-year-old songwriter. The one you're thinking of is someone else. I forgot who, though.

    Tuk Tuk is Tukker's nephew IIRC.

    Tukker was a member of our community going back to the HB days. I'm definitely sure he was the ex-NHLer.
    avatar
    wprager
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Number of posts : 48173
    Age : 56
    Location : Kanata
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-08-05

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by wprager on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:02 pm

    asq2 wrote:
    wprager wrote:Not Tukker. Tuk Tuk is a 17-year-old songwriter. The one you're thinking of is someone else. I forgot who, though.

    Tuk Tuk is Tukker's nephew IIRC.

    Tukker was a member of our community going back to the HB days. I'm definitely sure he was the ex-NHLer.

    Not familiar with that Tukker. I don't think we ever had a member named Tukker, but Tuk Tuk goes by Tukker elsewhere.

    There was a poster here who claimed he was an ex NHL player, having played a couple of games with Detroit and then the Rangers. Neely later brought third-party proof that he was a fraud.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey/Archive34#Christian_Robert-Godfrey


    _________________
    Hey, I don't have all the answers. In life, to be honest, I've failed as much as I have succeeded. But I love my wife. I love my life. And I wish you my kind of success.
    - Dicky Fox

    NEELY
    Mod
    Mod

    Number of posts : 20732
    Age : 34
    Location : Ottawa
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2011-02-24

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by NEELY on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:13 pm

    asq2 wrote:
    wprager wrote:Not Tukker. Tuk Tuk is a 17-year-old songwriter. The one you're thinking of is someone else. I forgot who, though.

    Tuk Tuk is Tukker's nephew IIRC.

    Tukker was a member of our community going back to the HB days. I'm definitely sure he was the ex-NHLer.

    LOL, really man?
    avatar
    wprager
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Number of posts : 48173
    Age : 56
    Location : Kanata
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-08-05

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by wprager on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:25 pm

    asq2 wrote:
    wprager wrote:Not Tukker. Tuk Tuk is a 17-year-old songwriter. The one you're thinking of is someone else. I forgot who, though.

    Tuk Tuk is Tukker's nephew IIRC.

    Tukker was a member of our community going back to the HB days. I'm definitely sure he was the ex-NHLer.

    What did you mean by "HB days", hfboards.com?

    I searched for tukker on hfboards.com and hockeytraderumors.com with no hits. Must have been something else.


    _________________
    Hey, I don't have all the answers. In life, to be honest, I've failed as much as I have succeeded. But I love my wife. I love my life. And I wish you my kind of success.
    - Dicky Fox
    avatar
    asq2
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 7179
    Favorite Team : Detroit
    Registration date : 2008-08-05

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by asq2 on Sun Mar 06, 2011 12:29 pm

    Haha, I was kind of hoping it would go in this direction. Tukker was a poster on HockeyBuzz (HB) and one of the more frequent posters here in the early days of the site. Look up "Tukker's Best of Franchise Series," for example.

    He definitely was - or claimed to be - Christian Robert Godfrey. That's even a profile under the "Fighting Montagoose Sighting Society" facebook group. Maybe he (Tukker) is that person but that person wasn't an ex-NHLer; I don't know.

    He also left the site as Tuk Tuk joined. So maybe they're the same person. The point is, I don't really care either way. And obviously no one has any intention of banning Tuk Tuk for masquerading as someone else, if that's what he did, because he's a quality poster and an established member of the community.

    Now, I'm not sure how Roche is a different situation.

    NEELY
    Mod
    Mod

    Number of posts : 20732
    Age : 34
    Location : Ottawa
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2011-02-24

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by NEELY on Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:16 pm

    asq2 wrote:Haha, I was kind of hoping it would go in this direction. Tukker was a poster on HockeyBuzz (HB) and one of the more frequent posters here in the early days of the site. Look up "Tukker's Best of Franchise Series," for example.

    He definitely was - or claimed to be - Christian Robert Godfrey. That's even a profile under the "Fighting Montagoose Sighting Society" facebook group. Maybe he (Tukker) is that person but that person wasn't an ex-NHLer; I don't know.

    He also left the site as Tuk Tuk joined. So maybe they're the same person. The point is, I don't really care either way. And obviously no one has any intention of banning Tuk Tuk for masquerading as someone else, if that's what he did, because he's a quality poster and an established member of the community.

    Now, I'm not sure how Roche is a different situation.

    Haha, oh man, it was the same kid, hahaha.

    Sponsored content

    Re: The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:51 pm