Quote Originally Posted by Nemesis View Post
Excellent description of the rule, and I agree with you 100% on all that. And you're right; a good hacker won't be caught, until he makes a mistake. Same thing with criminals, you don't catch the really good ones, that's why jails are filled with black people.

You know he's hacking, Cyber knows he's hacking and I know it, yet we still need proof. We taut an infallible rule system here that is referenced on a daily basis, yet now something that doesn't fit quite right and we're throwing the whole thing out? That's wrong and at that point might as well delete the rules and just let people who are "trustworthy" make the decisions as they see fit, without guidelines. see how that works out.

You don't alter the system to fit your conditions, you alter your conditions to fit the system. Want to ban the guy? Get the demo. Demo was deleted when your computer crashed? Better luck next time.
cyber and i aren't altering any rules. we're operating off of precedent. ITB's perma ban on milky set this precedent, that admission of guilt is enough for a perma ban. no rule states that demos must be posted, it's traditional but some cases have extenuating circumstances and those need to be considered. also from zero's post on the links to demos page, "These demos are acceptable as evidence for reporting admin abuse and hackers." the demos are acceptable, not mandatory. there is no rule being changed, no rule being ignored, no rule being created by any of this.

there's also this thread ( http://www.ibisgaming.com/forums/sho...light=tehfudge ) in which it seems to me the ban was made not after watching a demo (as no ULA posted) but from the admittance that he was bhop scripting. and that's not even walls, just a bhop script. fudge admitted to it, and maynard (another clan member) banned him. if the demo i provided was watched and that's why the user was banned, then this particular case can be ignored but it appears to me that maynard banned solely off the admittance of bhop scripting.