Ron Paul 2012 (yes... mozart A FOURTH TIME!)

[CYBER]

insufficient evidence for the hacks on the OTHER thread? or for assuming it was the same guy?
because if u are answering for "assuming it was the right guy" then i want to point out that he has already been unbanned temporary.

now if you were referring to the hacks by the OTHER thread, i would have appreciated it if you replied to the other thread.

EDIT: never mind u answered my question by posting on the other thread. thx for feedback, although a more elaborate answer explaining certain ticks would have been nice, just so that we see what you saw.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

insufficient evidence for the hacks on the OTHER thread? or for assuming it was the same guy?
because if u are answering for "assuming it was the right guy" then i want to point out that he has already been unbanned temporary.

now if you were referring to the hacks by the OTHER thread, i would have appreciated it if you replied to the other thread.

EDIT: never mind u answered my question by posting on the other thread. thx for feedback, although a more elaborate answer explaining certain ticks would have been nice, just so that we see what you saw.

both threads need to be resolved and closed, you cant just let this one hang in limbo never to be seen again, thus the bump. Inconclusive evidence is still relevant here because you are banning him on the basis that he has multiple accounts, you have 0 proof to provide us with that backs your claim regarding this individual being the same individual from the other ban thread.

[maynard]

closed. unbanned.