The long investigation that led to the new sponsorship rules

    Share

    wprager
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Number of posts : 49049
    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.

    asq2
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 7179
    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
    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.
    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 1:43 pm

    Well, that's what I figured, and that's the conclusion I've been aiming towards with my last few posts (better you say it than me, haha). But that being the case, it's still not a big deal.

    Is there a double standard at work here, or is it that Notch was a d-bag under his other accounts that distinguishes the two?

    Again, I still don't see the harm in letting Roche stay on so long as he was posting hockey-related things. If he was to revert to FireonIce-esque behaviour, or if he had already as Rooney suggested, then he should be/should have been banned for that. Or if it's the whole lying about your persona thing, then Tuk Tuk should be banned (though obviously he shouldn't).

    What gives?

    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 1:44 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.

    Asq2, I totally respect you & where you're coming from. You're one of a handful of posters who never gets in a row with anyone, and you always have something useful to say.

    On Roche, all I can say is that I would feel really bad if he wasn't Notch. 90% of my dislike of the guy had everything to do with the assumption that he was Notch (OK, I hated his "my army of friends just told me..." tactics, but whatever, that I can handle). And if he wasn't Notch, I'm sure most of his dislike for me came from the fact that I thought he was a fraud. As I told the Cap'n, I was 100% prepared to apologize if CR wasn't Notch.

    But there is so much that connect the two guys together -- same IP, same spot on the map (Newmarket), same type of posts between SS & CR (look at SS's old posts; they are all big CBA extracts, just like CR's) & location, & we know already that SS is Notch, too -- and, as the posts from Wprager and Cap'n suggest, there were other factors involved, including a series of PMs.

    Even if CR wasn't Notch, tho', he didn't handle the situation well: sending an ultimatum to ownership saying "me or rooney, decide" was, for instance, I hope we can agree, over the top. All he needed to do, too, was show that he was anyone other than Notch, and the problem would have disappeared. That would have been easy enough to do: I know I can prove my identity in about 5 seconds by pointing you to a publicly accessible website, which lists my email & phone extension; email that address or phone that # at the appropriate time, and you'll find me at the other end. Just about anyone who works should be able to do the same. And as I said in a post that disappeared last night, I invited CR to do this numerous times -- his 'identity' was already known, after all -- but he never took me up, even in spite of offers to reciprocate, to make things fair.

    If CR was Notch, as seems most likely in the opinion of the collective wisdom of the people who oversee this sight & know a hell of a lot more about the techno stuff than I do, well, ownership has a hard line stance against Notch for his previous history. And that is position that you'll have to take up with them. All I can say in defence of that position is that I know Notch has been a pain in the Donkey for them, on a number of occasions, and I understand entirely the principle of '20 times bitten, 21th time shy.' The guy has repeatedly spit in the face of this site.

    NEELY
    Mod
    Mod

    Number of posts : 20732
    Age : 35
    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 1:54 pm

    asq2 wrote:Well, that's what I figured, and that's the conclusion I've been aiming towards with my last few posts (better you say it than me, haha). But that being the case, it's still not a big deal.

    Is there a double standard at work here, or is it that Notch was a d-bag under his other accounts that distinguishes the two?

    Again, I still don't see the harm in letting Roche stay on so long as he was posting hockey-related things. If he was to revert to FireonIce-esque behaviour, or if he had already as Rooney suggested, then he should be/should have been banned for that. Or if it's the whole lying about your persona thing, then Tuk Tuk should be banned (though obviously he shouldn't).

    What gives?


    One's an adult the other hadn't hit puberty? Also, one was trying to hurt the site because of a personal problem with whoever or whatever.
    I actually laughed out loud in that previous post, I wasn't trying to be a Richard.
    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 1:57 pm

    See, the PM stuff I don't know anything about, but if it's as you say (and I don't really have any reason to disbelieve you), then it's bannable.

    Again, I'm not trying to blame anyone and I don't necessarily disagree with the decision, I've just been unsatisfied with the reasons given.
    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 2:00 pm

    NEELY wrote:One's an adult the other hadn't hit puberty? Also, one was trying to hurt the site because of a personal problem with whoever or whatever.
    I actually laughed out loud in that previous post, I wasn't trying to be a Richard.

    Haha, no worries.

    So, to make it clear, by "harming the site" we mean that he asked for rooney to get banned.

    Fair enough, though I don't think he'd ever succeed.

    EDIT: To clarify, I don't mean to make light of the situation. He should definitely have been kicked off the site if his sole goal in coming here was to ingratiate himself to the mods such that he could get them to ban you, especially if he was Notch. I just meant that I don't think he would ever have gotten to that point.

    NEELY
    Mod
    Mod

    Number of posts : 20732
    Age : 35
    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 2:05 pm

    Nono, when he went by the "Notch" handle he just continued to join and be an abnoixious as possible when possible. People asked him to go away and he refused... anyways, I didn't know about the PM stuff either so it just adds to the fact a lot of people didn't want him around because of various things.
    avatar
    LeCaptain
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 12030
    Age : 30
    Location : Montreal, QC
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-12-01

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

    Post by LeCaptain on Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:09 pm

    NEELY wrote:
    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.

    Christian RObert Godfrey and Tuk Tuk have 2 different profiles on facebook, one born in 1965 and the other, the musician is a teenager.
    avatar
    wprager
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Number of posts : 49049
    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 3:59 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.

    Ah, now it's beginning to ring a bell. However the last I see of Tukker on HB is Oct. 22 2007. Tuk Tuk registered here in the summer of '09. You are way off on your timing.

    When Tukker came here we went through a phase of changing his userid -- at one point it was The Guy With The Mustache. By the time he had that particular handle Tuk Tuk was already a member here. This particular thread was started by Tukker when he was TGWTM (as can be observed from a little exchange by 'Guest' and DTR):
    http://www.gmhockey.com/t2358-favourite-bob-dylan-song

    You will notice that Tuk Tuk posts in that thread as well.


    _________________
    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 : 49049
    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 3:59 pm

    In case my point was lost in the facts, Tukker and Tuk Tuk are not the same person.


    _________________
    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 : 49049
    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 4:01 pm

    Oh, also, I don't recall Tukker (or TGWTM or one of his other names) ever pretending to be an ex-NHLer. At least not on here.


    _________________
    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
    hemlock
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 5005
    Location : Alberta
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2009-06-20

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

    Post by hemlock on Sun Mar 06, 2011 4:48 pm

    wprager wrote:
    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.

    Ah, now it's beginning to ring a bell. However the last I see of Tukker on HB is Oct. 22 2007. Tuk Tuk registered here in the summer of '09. You are way off on your timing.

    When Tukker came here we went through a phase of changing his userid -- at one point it was The Guy With The Mustache. By the time he had that particular handle Tuk Tuk was already a member here. This particular thread was started by Tukker when he was TGWTM (as can be observed from a little exchange by 'Guest' and DTR):
    http://www.gmhockey.com/t2358-favourite-bob-dylan-song

    You will notice that Tuk Tuk posts in that thread as well.

    I could have sworn that Tuk Tuk told me that Tukker was his uncle.
    avatar
    wprager
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Number of posts : 49049
    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 pm

    Maybe it's like saying Bob's my uncle.


    _________________
    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 9:05 pm

    This is a tremendously unimportant investigation, but to be fair Tuk Tuk's post revived that thread a month and a half after Tukker/TGWTM had been posting in it. Not entirely conclusive evidence there.

    And yeah, like Hem said (partly), I recall a conversation where Tukker or Tuk Tuk communicated that they were nephew and uncle, and that Tukker was moving to Sweden or something for work and so wouldn't be posting here any more.

    If Tukker didn't say he was an ex-NHLer on here, then he definitely did on HB, and I don't think we have any reason to assume that the HB Tukker and the GM Tukker are different people.

    At any rate, we're missing the forest for trees here. My point was, even if Tukker and Tuk Tuk are the same person, that doesn't mean we should ban him, because he's an excellent poster on here.

    Roche had his annoying habits but we all do, and he was a good poster (on that account). That's the connection I was trying to draw.

    That said, the PM stuff changes my position.
    avatar
    LeCaptain
    All-Star
    All-Star

    Number of posts : 12030
    Age : 30
    Location : Montreal, QC
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-12-01

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

    Post by LeCaptain on Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:10 pm

    hemlock wrote:
    wprager wrote:
    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.

    Ah, now it's beginning to ring a bell. However the last I see of Tukker on HB is Oct. 22 2007. Tuk Tuk registered here in the summer of '09. You are way off on your timing.

    When Tukker came here we went through a phase of changing his userid -- at one point it was The Guy With The Mustache. By the time he had that particular handle Tuk Tuk was already a member here. This particular thread was started by Tukker when he was TGWTM (as can be observed from a little exchange by 'Guest' and DTR):
    http://www.gmhockey.com/t2358-favourite-bob-dylan-song

    You will notice that Tuk Tuk posts in that thread as well.

    I could have sworn that Tuk Tuk told me that Tukker was his uncle.

    I'm telling you, tukker added me on FB a few years ago when I first joined here, and his name is GOdfrey and when you look at his friends list (easy, there'S only 5 people), you can see another guy named tukker there who is a musician and looks like a teenager. Pretty sure it's tuk tuk, from the pictures he posted here a while back.
    I think you're in there too PRages (in the friends list)
    avatar
    The Silfer Server
    Veteran
    Veteran

    Number of posts : 2270
    Age : 35
    Location : Ottawa, ON
    Favorite Team : Ottawa
    Registration date : 2008-10-14

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

    Post by The Silfer Server on Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:11 pm

    asq2 wrote:This is a tremendously unimportant investigation, but to be fair Tuk Tuk's post revived that thread a month and a half after Tukker/TGWTM had been posting in it. Not entirely conclusive evidence there.

    And yeah, like Hem said (partly), I recall a conversation where Tukker or Tuk Tuk communicated that they were nephew and uncle, and that Tukker was moving to Sweden or something for work and so wouldn't be posting here any more.

    If Tukker didn't say he was an ex-NHLer on here, then he definitely did on HB, and I don't think we have any reason to assume that the HB Tukker and the GM Tukker are different people.

    At any rate, we're missing the forest for trees here. My point was, even if Tukker and Tuk Tuk are the same person, that doesn't mean we should ban him, because he's an excellent poster on here.

    Roche had his annoying habits but we all do, and he was a good poster (on that account). That's the connection I was trying to draw.

    That said, the PM stuff changes my position.

    With all this talk back I'm beginning to think we should ban you... asq2... or is that asq3... Or even Asquaredx2????

    But seriously don't leave, I'll be quiet and behave myself.

    Sponsored content

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

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Jul 22, 2018 8:27 pm