5 ms·

Sometimes he/she/they would use multiple, separate accounts in the same thread. Is it possible they post from work, and hence share the same IP address with ot

Sometimes he/she/they would use multiple, separate accounts in the same thread. Is it possible they post from work, and hence share the same IP address with other HN posters? Microsoft is a big place.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
I often get locked out of Google and Stackoverflow for "botting" from work when its obvious I'm just a casual user. I think this has something to do with the way the proxy is setup.
jlgreco 13y ago
This is PG. If he doesn't think it is just a bunch of well-meaning commenters coincidentally behind the same NAT, then I am inclined to believe him. Anyway, do you know what I do when there are discussions online about my employer? I stay the fuck out of it. I think that is good policy, unless participating in those discussions is part of your job description. Best case scenario here: a bunch of well-meaning Microsoft employees got into an internet fight, got mistaken for a sockpuppet ring, and got a discussion about their company pushed off of HN? If that's in their job description, I don't know why they're still getting paid; if it isn't, maybe they should consider spectating next time.
- Anderkent 13y ago
  > Anyway, do you know what I do when there are discussions online about my employer? I stay the fuck out of it. That's a shame, since as an employee you have an unique and very valuable perspective on the company. Why not participate, perhaps add a disclaimer?
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    I understand that perspective, but what I know is either public knowledge, or behind a few NDAs. Furthermore, my employer politely asks that I don't, and I'd rather not anyway. Online PR, no matter how unofficial, isn't something that I am comfortable with.
    - Dylan16807 13y ago
      Public doesn't mean widely-known. And I feel vaguely uneasy at the idea that everything not explicity public would be NDA. That said, I fully respect the preference not to and the request not to.
- eksith 13y ago
  Anyway, do you know what I do when there are discussions online about my employer? I stay the fuck out of it. This is an excellent policy. Employee participation (unless they're CEO/Founder, CTO or some combination thereof that can speak with authority) will almost invariably lead to problems. It's good that some employees feel "passionate" and "enthusiastic" about their company/product, but if that's left unchecked and they refuse to remain objective, it will not prevent the thread from going up in a passionate and enthusiastic fire ball. Same applies to social media.
  - yuhong 13y ago
    I don't think this is good policy in this day and age.
Natsu 13y ago
While I can see how that would explain separate IPs, I do not see how it would explain separate accounts posting agreement with themselves and it would certainly create an appearance of sockpuppetry.
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  Multiple users with accounts behind the same proxy could have the same IP address.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago

I often get locked out of Google and Stackoverflow for "botting" from work when its obvious I'm just a casual user. I think this has something to do with the way the proxy is setup.

jlgreco 13y ago

This is PG. If he doesn't think it is just a bunch of well-meaning commenters coincidentally behind the same NAT, then I am inclined to believe him. Anyway, do you know what I do when there are discussions online about my employer? I stay the fuck out of it. I think that is good policy, unless participating in those discussions is part of your job description. Best case scenario here: a bunch of well-meaning Microsoft employees got into an internet fight, got mistaken for a sockpuppet ring, and got a discussion about their company pushed off of HN? If that's in their job description, I don't know why they're still getting paid; if it isn't, maybe they should consider spectating next time.

Anderkent 13y ago
> Anyway, do you know what I do when there are discussions online about my employer? I stay the fuck out of it. That's a shame, since as an employee you have an unique and very valuable perspective on the company. Why not participate, perhaps add a disclaimer?
- jlgreco 13y ago
  I understand that perspective, but what I know is either public knowledge, or behind a few NDAs. Furthermore, my employer politely asks that I don't, and I'd rather not anyway. Online PR, no matter how unofficial, isn't something that I am comfortable with.
  - Dylan16807 13y ago
    Public doesn't mean widely-known. And I feel vaguely uneasy at the idea that everything not explicity public would be NDA. That said, I fully respect the preference not to and the request not to.
eksith 13y ago
Anyway, do you know what I do when there are discussions online about my employer? I stay the fuck out of it. This is an excellent policy. Employee participation (unless they're CEO/Founder, CTO or some combination thereof that can speak with authority) will almost invariably lead to problems. It's good that some employees feel "passionate" and "enthusiastic" about their company/product, but if that's left unchecked and they refuse to remain objective, it will not prevent the thread from going up in a passionate and enthusiastic fire ball. Same applies to social media.
- yuhong 13y ago
  I don't think this is good policy in this day and age.

Natsu 13y ago

While I can see how that would explain separate IPs, I do not see how it would explain separate accounts posting agreement with themselves and it would certainly create an appearance of sockpuppetry.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago
Multiple users with accounts behind the same proxy could have the same IP address.