Equitendallas

by **jayl0ve** » Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:24

I don't really feel right talking about him (Equities) when he's not here to defend himself, so I think we should just drop it.

by **Q. Reese** » Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:55

I agree with you. I said that I thought he was a nice guy, and I think my post was deleted (sorry if I was not supposed to say that).

by **djarvik** » Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:00

Let just lock this thread, so we don't have to delete anymore Q's posts.

by **Amazing Matheja** » Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:16

To me,Q is trying to reach 9000 or 10000 post before end of year!
I bet he could be very close to 9000!

by **jayl0ve** » Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:20

It seems like he was at 7,000 only a month or two ago. Totally insane.

by **ChunkDEUCE** » Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:16

I'm not talking bad about him, I just simply want to know what happened in the past, seeing as I recently joined the tour, I don't know.

by **Rob ITST** » Fri, 11 Dec 2009 02:35

Legends 2004 and Legends 2005 were brothers who mostly just caused a lot of fights on the forum and were disrespectful towards hosts and other members. They were finally banned for posting a fake result in a match, and conspiring to create fake evidence of the result - one brother posted the fake score, the other claimed to have witnessed the match. They then submitted a Photoshopped image of the match result.

Equitesindallas and Gunz Buz n Lust are the same brothers. They were banned for a number of reasons. One reason was for being the "Legends" (the Legends were not only banned once, but on at least 3 other occasions under different names), and another was playing matches for each other. When they were accused of playing each others matches, we checked for IP matches and discovered that they had posted from the same IP on several occasions. When asked to explain the matching IP, the reason they gave could not possibly have been a reason for the match - it was a clear attempt to hide the truth.

by **Q. Reese** » Fri, 11 Dec 2009 08:07

Rob,

Who are we to question ITST's decision? I am sure you had good reasons to ban the individual(s). The biggest things is for it not to happen again. I am sure that keeping a close eye on the IP addresses will help ITST in this regard.

by **Chederer** » Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:52

the IP address check will always do the trick

IMO

by **djarvik** » Fri, 11 Dec 2009 16:01

Q. Reese wrote:Rob,

Who are we to question ITST's decision? I am sure you had good reasons to ban the individual(s). The biggest things is for it not to happen again. I am sure that keeping a close eye on the IP addresses will help ITST in this regard.

We ARE the ITST dummy. :lol:

ITST is a community, not a person.

IP address is tricky. It is relatively easy to emulate IP address. It is a first of many levels of security that ITST utilizes. :wink:

Smartasses beware! :lol:

by **Moralspain** » Fri, 11 Dec 2009 17:17

djarvik wrote:
Q. Reese wrote:Rob,

Who are we to question ITST's decision? I am sure you had good reasons to ban the individual(s). The biggest things is for it not to happen again. I am sure that keeping a close eye on the IP addresses will help ITST in this regard.

We ARE the ITST dummy. ITST is a community, not a person.

IP address is tricky. It is relatively easy to emulate IP address. It is a first of many levels of security that ITST utilizes. Smartasses beware!

by **Q. Reese** » Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:28

CHEDERER wrote:the IP address check will always do the trick IMO

Well, it is obvious but tends to be easily overlooked. It seems like Rob is going to dedicate his management with this concern. I think it is a great idea, because some members keep slipping through the cracks. :wink:

by **GOA MASTER MDMA** » Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:31

so equietesindallas is banned permanently ?
i thought he was only suspended ?

Equitendallas

Who is online