Oh so as soon as I’m able to produce evidence against your dumb assertions, you back down and ask me why I’m here. Typical.
It’s fun to argue with people who feel so strongly that they’re correct when I can prove them wrong. Because you will ALWAYS double down and refuse to accept facts rather than admit it. I didn’t even get my “exploited” rep removed, so literally all I lost was the ability to play on my main for 4 days. If you want to call it crying when I’m sitting here back on my main, enjoying the game with extra benefits, go ahead : )
Sounds like, to me, people prefer “alternative facts” these days. Won’t mention where that came from, but we all know. 
Cheaters deserve the ban hammer, but at the same time its not THAT serious for me to be upset about it.
No, just the ones who stayed logged on enough on their other account while doing this to trigger the threshold for automatic banning. You passed that threshold. Others did not. This means your claim of intent is in contradiction with the available evidence. You were excessively benefiting while other, actual innocents, did not. Therefore, they err on the side of you were FA so you get to FO.
This still makes me smile. I feel bad about anyone who was tied to the people who did the exploiting, but we all choose the friends we play with, and even if they did not exploit, they knew about it. Hopefully Blizz continues to root out people who have to cut corners and cheat to have an advantage.
U sending a screenshot is evidence? That’s right up there with everything i see on the Internet is real. Your going nowhere.
What extra benefits are you getting? We all gonna get those they aren’t time exclusive… Keep talking about how cool you are to cope with your 4 day ban lol.
You’re making a semantic argument that doesn’t actually make any sense. I (or, for sake of argument if you think I’m lying, somebody who is in the position that I claimed) still didn’t intentionally exploit and got punished. It doesn’t matter if me (or whomever) excessively benefitted, if it wasn’t intentional. It’s not against the terms of service to be the recipient of benefits from a bug. It’s against the terms of service to exploit, and the word exploit implicitly requires intent.
I got a cute spider pet rn and a title 
Also nice job completely dropping the ball and losing this argument. If you claim there’s no benefits, then there was no reason to ban, was there? Checkmate.
Evidence of you exploiting is that you benefited repeatedly. It’s all they have to go on. It’s not court. They don’t have to prove beyond reasonable doubt. They just have to look at the fact that your actions fall in line with other people who exploited to a degree that it made you stand out. Simple as that.
Thats generally the consensus, but Blizzard gets huge marketing from it. While those top guilds owned by esports corps. rake in promotional funds, streaming views, Twitch gets a huge boost, and so on and so forth.
Its basically corporate fund raising disguised as a community event now. It was cool years ago, now its another corporate jerkfest.
maybe blizzard could send people to their houses to put sand in their shoes and curdle their milk
Sure, whatever makes them miserable.
My point is to make them hate what they love. That’s much worse than not being allowed to do it.
We will all end up with them claiming like they are extra and only you get them is asinine
You’re flip flopping on what you’re actually arguing. Of course that’s all they have to go on. So their choice is to either for sure punish innocent people, or to not ban anyone. One of those options is moral, one isn’t.
4 days off for all that rep? Great trade off.
All that matters is that the rep is rolled back. If it isn’t, then who cares.
I have not changed my argument. That’s your misunderstanding.
First it was “it’s fine to have zero tolerance because people who have never done anything wrong in the past can appeal”. Then it was “it’s fine to ban people who excessively benefitted because they can appeal”. Then it was “it’s fine to ban people who benefitted multiple times because they can appeal”.
You also continually dodge the question of why you think it’s ok for innocent people who happen to have “excessively benefitted” or “benefitted multiple times” should face punishment and have to appeal.