Author Topic: Multiple Accounts: rule_, HelloTeam (Read 11118 times)

Edgecrusher · « **Reply #20 on:** October 24, 2007, 09:27:05 AM »

Well this is different situation, since few committee members known about this prior to judgment. You can say that appeal has been made and you need to revision your judgment. New evidences has been presented. And from my point of view you dhould talk again either to leave or reduce the sentence.

y00tz · « **Reply #21 on:** October 24, 2007, 11:11:12 AM »

I'm confused, the committee will not go back on THIS ruling, or ANY ruling?

Edgecrusher · « **Reply #22 on:** October 24, 2007, 11:17:24 AM »

Well I don't think they will, I just tried to point out that there maybe have been made some wrong moves from their side, and that it would be fair to revision the issue.

Great persons are the one who admit that they made a mistake (no one is perfect and I'm not accusing anyone).

lekky · « **Reply #23 on:** October 24, 2007, 11:47:36 AM »

Quote from: y00tz on October 24, 2007, 11:11:12 AM

I'm confused, the committee will not go back on THIS ruling, or ANY ruling?

This ruling, I've made it clear previously we are happy to review our decisions.

Quote from: Edgecrusher on October 24, 2007, 11:17:24 AM

Well I don't think they will, I just tried to point out that there maybe have been made some wrong moves from their side, and that it would be fair to revision the issue.

Great persons are the one who admit that they made a mistake (no one is perfect and I'm not accusing anyone).

We haven't made a mistake here, thats why the decision isn't likely to change. I have said that we might consider the fact that a lot of people knew that he used both names in future cases, although some will argue this factor means nothing.

magalhaes · « **Reply #24 on:** October 24, 2007, 11:58:04 AM »

err lekky, seems like he told bitmate...he is a committee member..so...im just typing...sentences..separated by...cause i heard it's...c00l

coLa · « **Reply #25 on:** October 24, 2007, 01:34:44 PM »

what's done is done.

Rule_ · « **Reply #26 on:** October 24, 2007, 02:36:21 PM »

Quote from: Edgecrusher on October 24, 2007, 11:17:24 AM

Well I don't think they will, I just tried to point out that there maybe have been made some wrong moves from their side, and that it would be fair to revision the issue.

Great persons are the one who admit that they made a mistake (no one is perfect and I'm not accusing anyone).

I did admit that i made a mistake. Pretty much most of the ppl knew i was HelloTeaM. I never denied it and plus on irc i change my name to HelloTeaM all the time. Rule_ is now known as HelloTeaM. Why 16 day ban?

coLa · « **Reply #27 on:** October 24, 2007, 03:26:29 PM »

Quote from: coLa on October 24, 2007, 01:34:44 PM

what's done is done.

Rule_ · « **Reply #28 on:** October 24, 2007, 03:31:35 PM »

Quote from: coLa on October 24, 2007, 03:26:29 PM

I know but it seems unfair... $:-\$

DaRkNeSS · « **Reply #29 on:** October 24, 2007, 03:34:44 PM »

Quote from: Edgecrusher on October 24, 2007, 09:27:05 AM

Well this is different situation, since few committee members known about this prior to judgment.

All of the committee members would have known about it, if we actually had a committee made up of people who are actually active in the game.

FlaMe · « **Reply #30 on:** October 24, 2007, 04:01:54 PM »

amen dark... nd bitmate knew so did spook before the committee even happened. there was never a lie. and the rules say 8 day ban for those who come clean. he came clean and committee members knew beforehand and he never denied it

lekky · « **Reply #31 on:** October 24, 2007, 04:13:29 PM »

Quote from: lekky on October 23, 2007, 08:32:49 PM

Well we had a lengthy discussion about this, and because we had already come to a decision by the time helloteam came to us we had to stick to the 16 day policy.

FlaMe · « **Reply #32 on:** October 24, 2007, 04:18:35 PM »

lekky i know the rule about "if its already under discussion its 16" but it couldnt have possibly been because there was nothing to discuss... bitmate knew even prior to the idea of a committee...

Henkka · « **Reply #33 on:** October 25, 2007, 06:37:03 AM »

Seems like everyone is getting the 16 day ban even if they confess so that rule is just a fake and the committee only says "We talked this over and came to this decision" even though they realize they have made a mistake by giving 16 days. Anyway, i don't care so much so keep going that way if u want.

XtremeBain · « **Reply #34 on:** October 25, 2007, 09:23:22 AM »

Quote from: Henkka on October 25, 2007, 06:37:03 AM

Seems like everyone is getting the 16 day ban even if they confess so that rule is just a fake and the committee only says "We talked this over and came to this decision" even though they realize they have made a mistake by giving 16 days. Anyway, i don't care so much so keep going that way if u want.

In order to get the 8 day ban you must have notified the committee prior to being under investigation. Once you're under investigation you're subject to the 16 day minimum.

Henkka · « **Reply #35 on:** October 25, 2007, 12:29:13 PM »

Well if that Rule guy told to bitmate (Who is in the committee, right?) about his multiple accounts before anyone started to investigate it, shouldn't it be only 8 days then? (Didn't understand your post properly because i'm 15 and from Finland

).

bitmate · « **Reply #36 on:** October 25, 2007, 12:44:00 PM »

I asked him if he uses 2 accounts, or if he just created the second account because he forget his password, or whatever.
Basically, we starting the investigation before he came clean.

Rule_ · « **Reply #37 on:** October 25, 2007, 01:47:29 PM »

wow are u kidding me? When i was on ch1ll for Rule_ sometimes during matches i would be "HelloTeaM". Or when on IrC i would change my name from Rule_ to HelloTeaM. I been having this double account for the longest time since GLS. I've never denied anything, also told everone who i am. Like Darkness said, "All of the committee members would have known about it, if we actually had a committee made up of people who are actually active in the game." They would of all known its was me the whole time.

bitmate · « **Reply #38 on:** October 25, 2007, 01:57:34 PM »

We all knew that you use both names, though, I neaver realised you use 2 accounts, one for each name.
Double accounting leads to a punishment, no matter how long you use them, why you use them, or whether anyone knows about it.

FlaMe · « **Reply #39 on:** October 25, 2007, 02:02:32 PM »

bitmate. the fact is that there was no investigation. the second someone said omg two accounts you should have been the one like "oh i knew that, theres no hiding hes told me those are his names"