<p>Yeah, horrible name I know. I want to make a vote to ban people who are clearly dupes but we don't have rock solid, titanium solid proof. It's clear they are trolling/ a dupe, but we don't have them saying "Hey, I am [Insert_User_Here]" so we can't ban them. Please Vote
</p><p>
</p><p>A. Yes (1)
</p><p>B. No (like, 23)
</p><p>C. Neutral
</p><p>D. Other (please specify)
</p>
<h2><span class="mw-headline" id="Consensus">Consensus</span></h2>
<p>No.
</p>
5,988
pages
ALL POSTS
0
B.
(Edited by Riolu777)
<p>If someone is "clearly a dupe", then that's close enough to "rock-solid proof". <font face="Impact" size="4" color="Navy">B</font> all de way.
</p>
(Edited by LordWeirdo)
<div class="quote">Da Weirdo wrote:
If someone is "clearly a dupe", then that's close enough to "rock-solid proof". <font face="Impact" size="4" color="Navy">B</font> all de way.</div> <p>... why is this B with that reasoning </p>
If someone is "clearly a dupe", then that's close enough to "rock-solid proof". <font face="Impact" size="4" color="Navy">B</font> all de way.</div> <p>... why is this B with that reasoning </p>
(Edited by Slicer Vorzakh)
<p>the entire point of banning them for being a dupe is that we know they're a dupe. and if we don't, it's speculation, and the risk of banning an innocent user is not worth it. B.
</p>
(Edited by FortressOfNight)
Can we just close this vote? The census seems pretty darn clear :P
(Edited by ShadowOfOblivion7119)
<p>There has to be a set time after the last vote for it to be close (five days I think)
</p>
(Edited by Slicer Vorzakh)
I see.
(Edited by ShadowOfOblivion7119)
0
B
(Edited by Jdude420)
<p>B, we don't want to ban an innocent new user just because they seem like a dupe. :)
</p>
(Edited by KnightoftheLight)
<p>B. Whether somebody is a dupe or not isn't something to be paranoid over, unless it's <i>causing a problem</i>. And if it's causing a problem, well, then that would imply that there's enough reason to block/ban/whatever.
</p>
(Edited by BrickfilmNut)