A completely unbiased rebuttal to cheating.

[RuneLateralus]

On 2004-02-04 07:45, BOmar wrote:
I don't really understand what Rune just said about the IP matching though, as he was IP banned before, so surely he couldn't get on with that IP?

Simple. ADE had been posting from a 2 networks when he was posting here. The first time he was banned, the IP the post was under was banned. When he came back, the IP ban had to be broadened, preventing him from coming back.

As InCognito, he must have been posting at a another network of computers that had different IP addresses. Normally, we wouldn't be able to find out if it was him or not unless ADE's name appeared under the same IP's. But just to find out for myself, I checked multiple posts from ADE and InCognito, and the IP check for them all said that ADE and InCognito posted from the same IP. Factor in the fanaticism and the subject of InCognito's argument was the same as ADE's with the all the IP checks, it is too much to be a coincidence.

If you are wondering how we missed that IP, well, Zarana hit it on the head. He must have been posting from school or at a library or something like that.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: RuneLateralus on 2004-02-04 08:37 ]</font>

[BogusKun]

Most likely. Since I do the same thing, it's best to assume someone could do that.

[LollipopLolita]

Someone is justa little jealous that he doesn't have the same capabilities to put up a good debate without flaming.

quit the indirect flames

It's a shame he had to be banned, as this topic was one of the few intellectual topics on these forums and it was interesting to see how some cheaters took such offense to something which was more of a discussion than a flame war.

rune was just doing his job. once banned always banned. trust me ade has already filled my inbox

I can see the ban of InCognito as logical and reasonable, but I am stuck with a puzzle. So, to alleviate my confusion, the answer to the following question might be useful:
If there is reason to reban InCognito/ADE, why not Barubary6? Or the other way around: If Barubary6 can stay, why not Incognito?
Barubary being banned several times already and not being banned at number 6 is a puzzle in the light of what I see here. I have said in discussions on Barubary6 that I don't have a problem with him/her as long as he/she behaves. The same would go for InCognito.
Or is it clear that Barubary6 is NOT the infamous Barubary? If so, why was that not in the discussion about it?

barubary was banned multiple times before prior to when watashiwa and erupt first came back. and then when they did come back and take over, erupt decided to erase all bans and everyone was allowed to start over clean. since then however, he has also made the rule that once banned, always banned. and since then barubary hasn't broken the rules to warrant a banning, only 1 warning. so you see, there is no puzzle. we don't care what you do in your time, but on psow you respect our rules. ade didn't and barubary does. And I don't like people lying to me, covering up their actions over email and then threatening PSOW.

[nineteen84]

1) WHAT WAS BARUBARY6 BANNED FOR? AND WHT WAS HIS WARNING FOR?
2) HOW MANY WARNINGS CAN YOU GET?
3) IF ADE HAS CHANGED WHY DONT YOU LET HIM BACK?

[RuneLateralus]

On 2004-02-04 11:28, nineteen84 wrote:
1) WHAT WAS BARUBARY6 BANNED FOR? AND WHT WAS HIS WARNING FOR?
2) HOW MANY WARNINGS CAN YOU GET?
3) IF ADE HAS CHANGED WHY DONT YOU LET HIM BACK?

First of all, it called caps lock. You might want to push it maybe.

1) It doesn't concern you, so don't worry about it.
2) Normally three.
3) Then we would have to let everyone back. ADE doesn't merit special treatment. No one does.

And lets face it, the thread is done. InCognito is ADE, he was banned as ADE, so he has to be banned as InCognito. End of story. End of thread. Good day.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: RuneLateralus on 2004-02-04 11:37 ]</font>