Thread:Alliterator85/@comment-67.3.88.251-20150131034740/@comment-5108785-20150131131052

71.32.168.62 wrote: I was banned forever for using multiple accounts. Which wasn't a rule to abide by at the time anyways. But according to Lakaz, since it wasn't a rule at the time being, I still had to abide by it anyways. Sorry Lakaz, but I'm not a time traveler. ...As much as Djay's already said most everything that CAN be said of relevence to this discussion, i'd like to correct this misconception of what i said real quick. What i said was: It was a rule at the time, but one you couldn't have known existed. Sure, you could've used common sense, but if it wasn't written you have... at least half a point in that you didn't know with a hundred percent certainty. So if you broke it, it'd be pointed out and odds are you'd get a lot more sympathy than you currently are. However, after it had been pointed out as a rule to you, by the moderators who MAKE the rules, You broke it again. At this point you lose the excuse that it wasn't written on the "Rules" page, because you knew full well that the rule existed, and that's where we start getting annoyed. It doesn't require time travel to actually read what you've been told in the past by the rulemakers, especially since these comments are logged by the wiki for you to go back and read, so even if you had a excuse for your first breach of that rule- albiet a fairly flimsy one- you didn't for all consecutive ones

Also, as a side note: I take offence at jordans "15 years old" comment. I was MUCH better than this at fifteen :P Heck, most 15 year olds i know are better than this in terms of logical reasoning, understanding what they've been told and just plain not being stubborn. In fact i know one or two people who were better than what's on display by hunter here by ten. The problem is, i know 20/25 year olds who're actually slightly worse. My point is- age is irrelivant to maturity.