Talk:Ban: Difference between revisions
From Hattrick
Jump to navigationJump to search
Mr Wednesday (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
oops |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Any comments on this or references (for or against) would be greatly appreciated. --[[User:Mr Wednesday|Mr Wednesday]] 18:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC) | Any comments on this or references (for or against) would be greatly appreciated. --[[User:Mr Wednesday|Mr Wednesday]] 18:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
: except for 1 little typo, I think this covers it nicely. --[[User:Ukelele|ukelele]] 18:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
::It wasn't a typo, "lest" was the word I intended to use. [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lest] --[[User:Mr Wednesday|Mr Wednesday]] 18:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
::: Oops sorry, I wasn't familiar with that word. ;) --[[User:Ukelele|ukelele]] 19:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:41, 2 October 2006
Why is it not allowed to discuss bans in conferences?
Proposed text to answer this question:
- The Hattrick Team has always stated that the reason for their rule against discussion of bans on the conferences is that they cannot disclose their methods of identifying cheaters, lest the cheaters figure out better ways of evading detection, and they do not wish to make exceptions for clear-cut cases.
Any comments on this or references (for or against) would be greatly appreciated. --Mr Wednesday 18:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- except for 1 little typo, I think this covers it nicely. --ukelele 18:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- It wasn't a typo, "lest" was the word I intended to use. [1] --Mr Wednesday 18:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oops sorry, I wasn't familiar with that word. ;) --ukelele 19:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
