Staredit Network

Then if those are the true reasons Kellimus "whined and cried", then doesn't that prove the point of the admin not doing their job? Allowing flame to run freely? By the way: He didn't only care about himself, he cared about the flame that everyone was throwing around

He didn't care that there was flamming. He cared about how he thought he was the only one being warned. He didn't think "Man this site has gotten hostle, someone should stop it" he thought "But I want to flame and not be warned."

How do you know? Can you read his mind? No, you can't. I just asked him why he spoke out against the admins, and he told me it was because he was being flamed constantly, and he wanted to point out that the admins sucked

Wow. Really?
Maybe if you asked hitler why he did what he did it was just to show that America sucks. And not that he hated jews. Of course if you ask Kelli he's going to say somethign different that doesn't make him so selfish. Plus I doubt Kelli really cares what anyone thinks of him on SEN anymore anyways, there's really no point defending him, or going agaisnt him for that matter.

I fail to see how multiple accounts can be punishable.

This is probably the first forum i've seen that restricts alt accounts.
It's redicilous.

Voting some polls with other accounts,so what?
Jesus freaking christ,it's nothing big.

It would sort of defeat the points of most polls if you could rig them...

Yes, Rigging Poles. But pointlessly you could make your chances on the 50/50 and the Magic Boxes. Jeez with 17 accounts you could buy all the boxes and once you get the 200 and 100 stop. An almost guarantee at getting both with 17 choices.

Haha yeah I know, my mistake. I just went checking for any accounts I could have made but forgot about when I stumbled upon the Devlin wannabe. I think I saw him once on the West server and he was telling people he was me. Good times. I'm flattered.

I still wonder why he was in any position of authority.

I think that if he had pointed it out then people could of accepted that he did it to prove a point. However he waited till he got caught so that changes the circumstance from reason to excuse.

He probably made the accounts 6 months ago to rig a poll or two, then over time he carried on using them, then a few days ago he got caught for it and was like 'oh **** i've be caught, need an excuse' -- "yeah i did it to prove a point that the admins need to check multi accounting more often"

Truth be said multi accounting isn't that big of a deal in my opinion, however using it in a malicious way is. I am fine with him losing moderation but i think granting him that privilege again would defeat the purpose of any rules for multi accounting. Don't forget he had 17 accounts, that is a little extreme just to prove that you don't check double accounts ( even though at the time of them being made he wasn't moderator and had nothing to prove )

Case by case...Why not a solid level of rules? We'd have less unfair judgments with a solid level of rules. (If the rules are fair of course)

Haven't people gotten banned for double accounts before? Is DEAD's excuse a good one?

Because the only way to make a "fair" set of absolutely-enforced rules is either to make it so open-ended that it may as well be a couple of guidelines, or to write a thousand-chapter tome covering all possible situations, backgrounds, and exceptions.
The problem most don't realize is why we have rules -- in order to keep a good environment. People get so caught up in their 'omg rulez must be folowd!!!' that they forget to ask whether a particular instance is why the rule was made in the first place. If someone spams, but it doesn't clutter the forum, get in anyones' way, or use up any noticable amount of bandwidth or space, then do they still really need to be punished, seeing as what they did caused no one any harm?

It's the pricinciple of doing what you are told. If you are told not to do something, you are supposed to follow your orders. Just my phillosophy.

I don't get the big deal was. It's not like he was posting with those extra accounts...

You have a stalker Devlin, Maybe you should higher him and he can do you dirty deeds. He is practically you, lol. I was flattered when I first joined SEN, Dethawk changed his name to 2-2. and someone else was 4-4, I think a 9-9 too, I am not sure who they were. That was around the time where deathawk changed his name every month.

Actually I can kinda understand taking away his moderation.

I don't think anything would ever happen, but there's a chance he could get bored and do some other kind of experiments.

Okay. Don't refrain from giving me all your money.

Really? Does it check where the account is made or where the account Is regularly used? I mean like does it check the IP address of where it was made?

Haha at one point Ultimo changed his name to DevliN_ and we caused all sorts of confusion. That's the reason that that one "no changing your name to another member's name" rule exists.

Well said!

And where did DEAD cause harm? We all know that Moose had the final say on SEN's policy about OSMAP.

It's just the fact that he used the accounts to do something that he couldn't do alone.

Moose had the final say of the OSMAP question, not the poll.

He's also said, in this very thread I believe, that the OSMAP Poll was "one of the few polls very likely to affect his choice," or along those lines. Correct me if I'm wrong.