Genuine Question for Frequent Negative Posters

[Jeeqbit]

I have yet to see any actual proof of there being this hidden alt army.

Then you have not looked closely enough. They are typically a new forum user (made this year) and have a character with all crafters/gatherers leveled and 1 job leveled to 90. They are in a Free Company and are the only person in it, slowly ranking it up and often use the same second name as their main, although not always. Their character appearance is often the same or similar to their main, although not always.

If you don't know why someone would do this, let's just say they could make a lot of gil that way and work out the rest from there.

The accounts with the traits I described tend to make half the topics in this forum (and have for a very long time). Just SE banned a whole lot of them the other day as well as some of their new ones they tried to use in their place.

[Shurrikhan]

Then you have not looked closely enough. They are typically a new forum user (made this year) and have a character with all crafters/gatherers leveled and 1 job leveled to 90. They are in a Free Company and are the only person in it, slowly ranking it up and often use the same second name as their main, although not always. Their character appearance is often the same or similar to their main, although not always.

That, in itself, describes a poster, who has used a series of accounts, not an army.

I.e., the difference between bigamy and serial monogamy.

[Iscah]

That, in itself, describes a poster, who has used a series of accounts, not an army.

Why should the term "alt army" not be used to describe a large collection of alt accounts acting as a group and controlled by a single person?

It seems an accurate description to me. It reflects the number of accounts the person is using.

And yes, it is an army, not a series. They appear to have several active at any one time and sometimes stage arguments against themself or post multiple comments in a thread one after the other.

[Shurrikhan]

Why should the term "alt army" not be used to describe a large collection of alt accounts acting as a group and controlled by a single person?

It seems an accurate description to me. It reflects the number of accounts the person is using.

And yes, it is an army, not a series. They appear to have several active at any one time and sometimes stage arguments against themself or post multiple comments in a thread one after the other.

I've yet to see any more than two accounts at a time.

An army would be capable of hijacking threads wholesale and inflating like-counts regardless of public sentiment. His don't. His threads usually see as much activity as they do because they are directly lie near to an already contentious issue, and there are plenty of real posters responding with agreement to his less ironic / pure-bait posts, for the simple fact that they don't happen to be (taken from) rare or spurious positions.