TheMachine1 wrote:
Hadron wrote:
You have no evidence
This is not a criminal trial. The burden of proof is limited to more likely than not.
Hadron wrote:
there are lots of occasions in which you have been wrong from what I understand, Wicker being a case in point.
I never made claims to Wickers other likely ID's.
Hadron wrote:
Asides he can get around your bans anyway, so you may as well make the gesture of unbanning him.
More reason not unban him. If he has made a new least on life he would easily beable to create a new ID and start posting in a fashion that does not promote conflict.
1. Lets assume you got it wrong. In which case you probably have another member on here who is happily carrying on posting, and of course PMing them. Here is your evidence though now:
http://www.zomgaspies.com/viewtopic.php?t=387&start=15 I just dont like the idea of you acting on probabilities in such a fashion.
2. QM did, and action was taken on the basis of that.
3. How do you know he hasnt? Such a gesture would bring him back into the open, so you can keep tabs on him.