wrote:

shox wrote:

you evils

lol.. ? *

shox wrote:

'doom of borg'. you didnt want him play that time

lol.. ? *

shad's post was backing up dave, he tried to make a joke and people sarcastically flamed him
he didn't say anything about the memberlist of md in itself

*howcome when someone ever talks to/about shad it always comes back to the WHOLE of the evil clan, we all know shadow is in evil, but does that make every single evil shad? sorry but i'm afraid not - this has happened way too much
*we didn't not want him to play, we asked who it was

^

this wasnt supposed to be an attack against shad / evil. all i wanted to say is, that md should post known names instead of random car names, which could be anyone. since this memphis case in bbc, you all would dislike it, to play against fakers. thats why i brought up the 'doom of borg' story.

wrote:

hmm i (as a part, probably, of "you all") can live with playing against fakers as long as they dont cheat... its ok to get beaten by good players without knowing their real nick..
ofc in a cup this might rise problems but it would only change the situation if it is a banned player.. (in my opinion)

it does change any too if this player plays for 2 or 3 clans cause of fakenicking

wrote:

wrote:

Due to him getting caught cheating again he is not allowed to play this cup ofc. http://forums.excessiveplus.net/viewtopic.php?p=383668#383668

Wrong. He was accused of cheating, based on circumstantial, vague evidence. Nothing definitive came out of this (though i'm sure Skull and Mothertheresawar disagree). So if you say he's a cheater, that's nothing more than your own opinion at this point.

Carry on.

He was still rank banned so I doubt it really matters. Unless you want to argue he was innocent when he was "accused" the first time too. Laktos, mow etc, probably everyone who has any eye for stuff like that thought he cheated. And yes, in the end it's all about peoples opinions.

Why it was dropped is still a mystery to me, I guess because Skull was doing the accusing and some people couldn't see anything strange in the demo. But if you look up what games he racks up now, you clearly see they are not on par with what he showcased in those games. So I guess it had the same effect a ban would have had.

Can't say i'm in the loop as of late, so if there's new, definitive evidence to him being a big bad cheater, i'd expect it to pop up in the reports thread. The rank ban was whipped up by Skull, not through a general consensus as to Accurun's actual stature, and iirc, Mow was one of the people who were careful of passing any final judgement. I still think what was presented didn't hold up to what should be the standard of ban qualification.

Aye, sorry for spamming.