[KingLeonidas]

I dun get it. I know smurfers r bad but shudnt they be given 3 chances? I dunno but thats what i think. Still for the case of deniable, after chatting wif him i really do feel its really him playing.

[Aean(:]

Originally Posted by KingLeonidas

I dun get it. I know smurfers r bad but shudnt they be given 3 chances? I dunno but thats what i think. Still for the case of deniable, after chatting wif him i really do feel its really him playing.

i c what u did ther. shifty boy

[BaKaiNu]

Originally Posted by cure

Nice try, but because of this screenshot, whatever you've said just became invalid.


EDIT: Adding this screenshot to post on page one.

Rofl, nice catch. Didn't he already got an IP ban? =(

[cure]

That account was created alot earlier, hence why he could still use it.

[nirvAnA]

awesome work guys

i believe the only person we have IP banned was Zan because he delibretly started making new accounts with zan in them and there was no improvement in his behaviour, so it was much easier to just IP ban him then to keep banning his new accounts.

Its sad because there seems to be some good in BoxeR, signing up to give free coaching and all but his smurfing actions cannot be ignored. And if he follows the same path as zan we will IP ban him as well and he wont be able to view the site anymore.

[Zanderax]

Originally Posted by nirvAnA

awesome work guys

i believe the only person we have IP banned was Zan because he delibretly started making new accounts with zan in them and there was no improvement in his behaviour, so it was much easier to just IP ban him then to keep banning his new accounts.

Its sad because there seems to be some good in BoxeR, signing up to give free coaching and all but his smurfing actions cannot be ignored. And if he follows the same path as zan we will IP ban him as well and he wont be able to view the site anymore.

When I read Zan I was like "Oh crap what have I done?"
You must be really desperate to smurf the BSG. There is no cash prize and when you win the coach you get will know that you are in a higher league. Hardly the perfect crime.

[cruxis]

Ummmm, I'm not sure a simple IP check should be that all that is required to prove someone guilty. 99% of users have Dynamic IPs, so several users can have the same IP at different times. This also makes IP banning impossible, as they can just turn their router on and off and get a new one. Unless you ban a whole group of them, but then you'll be preventing innocent potential members from joining.

Here's a screenshot I took from a forum I moderate on. I searched my own IP address (As I have no reason to have fake accounts when I'm a mod), and these users have also had that same IP at one time or another.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[cure]

Originally Posted by cruxis

Ummmm, I'm not sure a simple IP check should be that all that is required to prove someone guilty. 99% of users have Dynamic IPs, so several users can have the same IP at different times. This also makes IP banning impossible, as they can just turn their router on and off and get a new one. Unless you ban a whole group of them, but then you'll be preventing innocent potential members from joining.

Here's a screenshot I took from a forum I moderate on. I searched my own IP address (As I have no reason to have fake accounts when I'm a mod), and these users have also had that same IP at one time or another.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

''

We didn't ban him just because of IP alone.
Trust us, we do have our ways of finding out who are smurfs. We can't really release everything here or the future offenders would know how we catch them right ? (:

[nirvAnA]

yes im aware of the problems cruxis.

we already highly suspected boxer was using those accounts from the replay analysis
and the identical ip address which i made sure wasnt shared by any other users was just the final confirmation of evidence.

[cruxis]

Just making sure it wasn't the only method you used to ban people.

[BordZ]

Interesting to see the responses, yes a 0 chance policy is the best to use here, smurfing is so low and can only hinder the progress of the community. Keep all the ways to keep people banned silent too, I think a guilty before innocent thing can work here because with IT the way it is there are always loop holes to get around ban implementation methods.


I'm just glad that I didnt play this latest bsg then, knowing my luck I would have got the smurfer in the 1st round but not been able to work his smurfing out.

[ke_ivan]

imagine a GSL champion smurfing a SEA account for fun lol. Not that i approve. Gotta say though, sponsors would be glad that such strict action was taken. No one would sponsor a tournament that have smurfettes.

[Delraich]

I agree with a tough stance on this. I think setting a high standard from the outset is very important and will send out the correct message.

[FvRsolis]

I'm happy with this result and I look forward to seeing everyone in the next BSG!

[tin]

people smurfing the BSG its cause its where all the cool kids hang out =D hope i can make it to the next few but

[TAminimat]

bee tee uu I firstly said that this guy was a smurfer :> but why aren't all the smurfers we've caught in the OP? Have they not been banned?

[pikk0n]

Mini... I doubt they'd remember ALL the past smurfers but from the looks of it, TKShadow has been in quite a number of BSGs as well as the most recent BSG. Oh... he was also the first DQ in the most recent BSG... :S

[cruxis]

I think he's asking why Kringe hasn't been banned.

[pikk0n]

LOL, Cruxis! Kringe wasn't DQed mainly because he failed to send the replays. As for him being a smurfette, it isn't proven yet.

[ToRSpartaz]

Good old Kringe, he was raging in the clan chat for aaaaages about it xDDD Haha and whats with DeniAble? Because ive seen him play once or twice same level of skill each time =/