General Would you take over an old member account?

[Cedric]

I've seen some admins take over old member accounts to make their communities look more active, and I'm curious—do you think it's ethical?


It's one thing to want to generate content and create activity, especially if an account seems abandoned, but is it really worth it? I mean, it’s pretty obvious. Do admins end up just kidding themselves by pretending there's more engagement than there really is? Or do you see it as a harmless way to boost activity and set an example for others to follow?


I'm interested to hear your thoughts on whether taking over a dormant account crosses an ethical line or if it’s justifiable for the sake of keeping the community looking alive.

 

[Cory]

I don't think it's ethical to be pretending to be someone else under their account. It's like when people create Facebook profiles acting as if they're someone else to gain money by making up fake stories. The original person behind the account is the only one who should be using that account, in my opinion. Acting like someone else under their account is posting false opinions and statements that you think the original account holder would post.

 

[Cpvr]

I believe it’s wrong to log into a user’s account and start posting as if you were that user. I’ll never understand why some forum owners decide to do this. It’s much better to post under your own account.





What if the actual user finds out that you’re using their name and impersonating them?

 

[Shawn Gossman]

I couldn't do it.

It's not ethical. It's lying. It's defrauding your members.

I also feel like if you do it, get caught, and your reputation is ruined, you deserve everything you get.

I'd rather just be me!

 

[frm]

do you think it's ethical?

Short answer is No.

Long answer is still No, kind of.

If you're going to create engagement, use a new account. That is, unless the old account was a paid or guest poster with no real ties to the community and you're replacing them with another poster.

 

[Al]

It's not something I would do. If you want additional content, just create a sock puppet account. A new member starting a discussion is more naturally believable than someone who joined on Apr 21, 2012 suddenly, and quite randomly, starting posting on Oct 08 2024.

(as an entirely hypothetical and not based on a real life example)

 

[Arantor]

The only time I 'take over' a member's account like that is if the member has passed away and I'm making sure that the account can't be logged into, while passing on any message from the family, if there is one. Doesn't come up often, mind, but always sad when it has.

 

[Wise Owl]

That sounds so odd to me. What is the point of doing it when I know in my heart that nobody is writing but me. It's like lying to yourself with the flaw you actually know you are being lied too. Just let the activity come and if there isn't, do better to generate it.

 

[frm]

The only time I 'take over' a member's account like that is if the member has passed away and I'm making sure that the account can't be logged into, while passing on any message from the family, if there is one. Doesn't come up often, mind, but always sad when it has.

I've only seen this done on XenForo, if you were around during that awful announcement
View attachment 240

And one other forum with a long-time member (15+ years).

I'm unsure how the admins handled it beyond a public-facing takeover, whether they handed the account off to a next-of-kin, etc. or just locked it down.

 

[Arantor]

My experience, such as it is, is that next-of-kin don't particularly want to take over the account, beyond a last message about how much the site meant, where relevant.

Much more common is just to lock the account down and be done with it.