askbob has created a myriad of accounts ever since coming to DDO. Initially, under the name scissorhands, he was banned for creating threads attacking the moderator/owners of DDO. Then he created the account askbob (for which he is currently referred to as), which was banned for making misogynistic comments. Another account was banned for posting pornographic content; and after this account was banned, Phil (the owner of DDO) requested that askbob return only after he matured. He has since created well-over fifteen accounts, all of which have been banned.
Yesterday, askbob created the account Forum_Moderator, impersonating Phil (the owner of DDO) and pretending to be the moderator of the forums.
Presumably in response to this, askbob was sent the following letter: “I am sending you a cease and desist order. You are no longer welcomed on Debate.org, and are not allowed to create any more accounts. You are now costing me money, and are causing me damages by continuing to create multiple accounts and posting prohibited content. If you continue to down this road, I will be forced to litigate this matter in order to be reimbursed for the time and money you are causing me to lose.”
askbob responded by stating: “What money could I possibly be costing by creating 1 account? If you show me that you are legitimately experiencing damages in any way, I will comply with your cease in desist order. However I find it rather difficult to imagine that damages could exceed 150 dollars as you stated that the site makes 150 dollars a month. (The site you said made 5 dollars a day on average.)”
This controversy has sprouted many opinions.
PoeJoe believes that Phil is technically correct. On the Internet, he posits, one does not have free speech. Further, DDO is private property, and the owner of private property is allowed to kick someone out and tell that one not to come back to which said kicked person must fully comply — similar to physical private property (i.e. a house). Ragnar_Rahl and TheSkeptic agree with these sentiments.
In response, askbob has stated that the Internet is entirely free for anyone to do anything (that follows the law, of course), and that he does indeed have free speech rights on the Internet.
Solutions have also been proposed.
Ragnar_Rahl writes: “Phil really should’ve tried to accommodate Bob — you know, ‘I’ll stop deleting your account if you promise to stop posting this, that, and the other thing.’ Worth a shot, especially since Askbob being askbob, he’ll be making trouble rights or no rights, and is prolly behind seven proxies so gl litigating.”
Logical_Master jokes, “Bob is well prepared to take this court as he has told me himself. Hopefully, he remembers to upload the trial to youtube,” before later stating: “I believe this matter has gone a bit too far. I have seen far more objectionable content posted by individuals who are not askbob and they have yet to be banned. As Ragnar as said, I think some form of a treaty should be organized or Phil should not bother actively working to delete accounts from askbob who is making harmless posts at best (though I do think Forum Moderator prank was out of line).” Logical-Master also states, “If he could prove that askbob had caused a high amount of members to leave this site and had lost him money, he’d have a case. But realistically, that doesn’t seem to be the case at all … the most Phil can successfully do is keep banning him.”
theLwerd states: “I hate when Phil threatens legal action when he’s got squat. In this case, someone is calling him out (instead of being scared by the term “legal action” like he’d expect young people who don’t know any better to be). Phil should just give up and move on. Bob’s not upsetting anyone, and Phil’s wasting his time. He’s only giving Bob more incentive to be a tool.” JBlake signals his agreement with this.
I-am-a-panda says simply: “Phil should just let Askbob be.”
Tags: askbob, ban, cease and desist — written by PoeJoe @ 9:16 am