Historical record of changed user names (crowdsourced and confessional)
« prev   random   next »

5
11

Historical record of changed user names (crowdsourced and confessional)

By justme following x   2018 Jan 12, 10:42am 1,702 views   123 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


Hi all, I think it is about time that we got a repository of historical user names and how they have been changed over time. Please contribute your knowledge. Changing usernames is an annoyance, and I don't feel like spending the energy trying to keep track of all the username shenanigans.

I hope this thread will crowdsource all the known username changes. Feel free to post your knowledge, and/or confess to your username changes. New users that are reincarnations of old users is also of interest.

I'll start:

Patrick: AKA Patrick
justme: AKA justme
iwog: AKA iwog
thunderlips11 AKA Lashkar-e-Trump AKA TwoScoops McGee AKA TwoScoopsPlissken (and more?)
?????? AKA BorderPatrol
Malcolm AKA Malcolm
mell AKA mell
errc AKA errc
?????? AKA FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE same person as DIE_BankofAmerica_FUCKING_DIE! but two different accounts
Ceffer AKA Ceffer
HEYYOU AKA HEYYOU
Tenpoundbass AKA Tenouncetrout
Straw Man AKA Satoshi_Nakamoto
Onvacation AKA alternate account for ?????????
dodgerfanjohn AKA Fuckingwhitemale AKA PEACEandGOODWILL AKA CovfefeButDeadly
Call it Crazy, Ironman, Sniper, other aliases or usernames: DrunkJazz, Iwogisapussy, DrunkSbh, Pussyhydrocarbon, Fuckmarcus
Headset AKA @Headset (welcome back!)

I have added to the list above as new knowledge is added in the comment section. Please add with the earliest known username in the left column. The order of the list is not intended to assign any particular significance, it was based mostly on who was recently active or who came to mind at the moment.

Comments 1 - 40 of 123     Next »     Last »

1   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 10:49am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

iwog AKA iwog
thunderlips11 AKA TwoScoopsPlissken (and more)
2   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 10:51am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I did implement that at one time and the data is still in the database, but again this seems to be concentrating on user personalities and not on the validity or utility of what the user is saying.
3   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 10:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Hmm, but the accumulated history of what user has been saying is important in estimating the merit of what they are currently saying.

Would be great if the username history feature was working, or even better, ban username changes altogether and revert them all back to their initial value.
4   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 11:03am   ↑ like (6)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

justme says
history of what user has been saying is important in estimating the merit of what they are currently saying


It's possible to look at it another way: estimating the merit of what people say based on pre-conceived notions of them is not really listening to them at all.
5   anon_fee10   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 11:04am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

justme says
Changing usernames is an annoyance, and I don't feel like spending the energy trying to keep track of all the username shenanigans.


Why does it matter, unless you're just looking to argue with certain people? Isn't the message they're typing more important?
6   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 11:12am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Hmm, I don't operate that way. When someone posts a well-reasoned argument or interesting information I give them a like, even if I generally have a low opinion of their blog scholarship (bloggership?). I think there may be plenty of evidence of that in patnet databases. I do however scrutinize the writings of known low-quality writers more carefully before accepting it, and often I do skip it altogether because I know, statistically it is not worth my time.
7   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   ignore (26)   2018 Jan 12, 11:15am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I would like to merge my DIE_BankofAmerica_FUCKING_DIE! account with my AFIA account if possible, please, Poobah Pat.
9   Ceffer   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 11:25am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I am still the same whinging, annoying dweeb being upended by a whale. I have, however, lost my single deluded follower. I am shattered.
10   HEYYOU   ignore (6)   2018 Jan 12, 11:27am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

HEYYOU wants to change his user name to" Patnet Genius" or "Fucking Idiot".
Can you post your choice?

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
AFIA


How many variations can we come up with? ;-)
11   cynn   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 11:43am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I have always been the original cynn.
12   anon_13ce6   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 11:57am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

HEYYOU says
HEYYOU wants to change his user name to" Patnet Genius" or "Fucking Idiot".
Can you post your choice?

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
AFIA


How many variations can we come up with? ;-)

Fucking genius
13   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 12:48pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

justme says
Would be great if the username history feature was working, or even better, ban username changes altogether and revert them all back to their initial value.


What's the point? The cost of creating a completely new account is essentially zero. If somebody wants you to not know his previous names it's easy to achieve.

PS. It's obvious that the people listed above didn't want to hide their previous identities.
14   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 1:13pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

BTW, when somebody changes their screen handle the new one will be displayed in all his past comments. So claims that screen handle changes somehow screws up the history are not really true.
15   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 1:33pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Satoshi_Nakamoto says
BTW, when somebody changes their screen handle the new one will be displayed in all his past comments. So claims that screen handle changes somehow screws up the history are not really true.


Not correct. Only quotes with the original username will not get changed, so you have to dig through old comments to guesstimate the original username.

Straw Man AKA Satoshi_Nakamoto
16   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 2:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

justme says
Satoshi_Nakamoto says
BTW, when somebody changes their screen handle the new one will be displayed in all his past comments. So claims that screen handle changes somehow screws up the history are not really true.


Not correct. Only quotes with the original username will not get changed, so you have to dig through old comments to guesstimate the original username.

Straw Man AKA Satoshi_Nakamoto


But if you click on the link it will lead to the original comment where the name will be changed to the most current. So, again, somebody who'd like to hide will simply create a brand new account.
17   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 3:04pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says
I would like to merge my DIE_BankofAmerica_FUCKING_DIE! account with my AFIA account if possible, please, Poobah Pat.

You mean afisadorable and afisshostikovitch.
Yes @patrick please merge the mighty AF's accounts. The combined accounts would be the most liked of all time. Not only does he have the lowest dislike /like ratio, he also is a fount of knowledge on gardening and self protection in the coming cannibal anarchy.

Please honor this fine person!
18   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 3:14pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

justme says
justme: AKA justme

Anon1: Anon7

It's pretty easy to spot some personalities though someone often sounds a lot like not someone.

I like Patrick's idea to focus on topics and opinions rather than personalalities. On the other hand it is helpful to see a name, know their history, and know you can scan or ignore.

Anonxyz123 is particularly annoying. At least commit to a name so we know we can ignore you.
19   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 3:18pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Onvacation says
Please honor this fine person!


OK, merging those accounts...
20   cynn   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 3:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

This all seems way too meta. What's the point?
21   cynn   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 3:29pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I mean, why not just stick with a profile, and stand by your words? Why change identities? Is there some nefarious purge happening?
22   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 3:35pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

OK @APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch you have just one account now, with the data merged.

You'll probably have to log in again, same email and password as your most recent account (APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE).

Let me know if any problems, here or mail p@patrick.net
23   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

"Not focus on personalities" == meekly accept blatant lies and intentional misinformation and propaganda?
24   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:23pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

cynn says
I mean, why not just stick with a profile, and stand by your words? Why change identities? Is there some nefarious purge happening?


Exactly, stand by your words.

There is no nefarious purge of name-changers. Just people who keep changing their usernames, and mostly because they know that it is hard for people to keep track of them, so they can get a fresh start in spreading misinformation, or if I want to be charitable, improve themselves and rebuild their sometimes tattered reputation.

Own up to your threads, own up to your comments. Especially since it is a virtual and therefore anonymous name anyway. There is a reason people in real life do not change their name all the time. And the reason is a mix of reputation and accountability. Be accountable!
25   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:26pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

justme says
"Not focus on personalities" == meekly accept blatant lies and intentional misinformation and propaganda?


Not at all. Talk about the lies, no the liar. If they just continue, give up and hit the ignore link. It's generally not possible to change the mind of a true believer in any case, except by convincing them that you are fundamentally on their side and bear them no emnity.

People use to not use the ignore link because they were worried the person ignored would be commenting about them. No longer! You can be sure there will be no discussion of any other user.
26   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:31pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Okay, which of the following are acceptable:

1. you lie! (was popular in congress :))

2. that's a lie!

3. UserX lied about Y in post Z

4. UserX is a habitual liar and propagandist

5. You should not pay attention to UserX because he lies all the time
27   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:37pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

None of them.

Even "that's a lie!" is about the user.

"That's not true" would be fine though, because it's about the veracity of the fact.
28   cynn   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:41pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Patrick, WTF. Can't we leave it alone?
29   cynn   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

You're conducting a rhetorical autopsy on this site. Really?
30   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 4:55pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

cynn says
Patrick, WTF. Can't we leave it alone?


Leave alone the topic of moderation? Sure, I'm pretty much done with it.
31   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 12, 5:11pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Patrick says
Not at all. Talk about the lies, no the liar. If they just continue, give up and hit the ignore link.

That's what I'm talking about. Argue against my
justme says
blatant lies and intentional misinformation and propaganda

Or just ignore me. No sense in calling someone stupid or ignorant. Just gently try to educate them.
The cognitive dissonance can only be ignored for so long.
32   CovfefeButDeadly   ignore (2)   2018 Jan 12, 5:57pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

This is just silly. Literally the whole site knows my two prior usernames.

Though it’s getting fun, playing coy about it.
33   justme   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 6:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

PEACEandGOODWILL says
Literally the whole site knows my two prior usernames.


PEACEandGOODWILL == dodgerfanjohn == ???????

I did not know, because I do no thave time to run around and triangulate all the split personalities on patnet. That's why I started this thread, so that people can help me.
34   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 7:10pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

OK, if people want to help you track their previous anonymous identity, no problem with that.
35   CovfefeButDeadly   ignore (2)   2018 Jan 12, 8:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

justme says
PEACEandGOODWILL says
Literally the whole site knows my two prior usernames.


PEACEandGOODWILL == dodgerfanjohn == ???????

I did not know, because I do no thave time to run around and triangulate all the split personalities on patnet. That's why I started this thread, so that people can help me.


Throw in Fuckingwhitemale.

Again, don’t understand how you did not know this.
36   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 12, 8:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says
I would like to merge my DIE_BankofAmerica_FUCKING_DIE! account with my AFIA account if possible, please, Poobah Pat.


It's done and you're back as your original self. Excellent!
37   anon_c22f8   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 13, 8:21am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Patrick says
None of them.

Even "that's a lie!" is about the user.

"That's not true" would be fine though, because it's about the veracity of the fact.

Not necessarily. If someone states something, then someone else points out that it is untrue and why, and that person still continues to post it, then they are lying. Why is it unreasonable to point that out? And it happens a lot on this site.
38   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 13, 8:26am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

To say it is a lie is an accusation a deliberate deception. Maybe the user really believes what they are saying.

In any case, it triggers an instant barrier to actual discussion of the thing under consideration, and begs for a counter-insult.
39   anon_1fe2e   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 13, 9:16am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Patrick says
To say it is a lie is an accusation a deliberate deception. Maybe the user really believes what they are saying.

I don't get what you're saying. Do you read the site? People constantly repeat nonsense even when it has been disproven. Again, under such circumstances, what is wrong with stating that is a lie, that you've been shown it's a lie, and that you are once again repeating that lie? Exactly who are you protecting here? Are we supposed to constantly refute the same point by the same person? That person is trolling and you are basically allowing them to do that.
40   Patrick   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 13, 9:16am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

No, do not keep refuting.

Use the "ignore" link.

Comments 1 - 40 of 123     Next »     Last »


Comment as anon_bb286 or log in at top of page: