Yes he did:

Violation of rules:

-2.1
-2.2

And I banned Lopezracing after he was banned by Jericho for the same reason, but he continued.

Spoutnik wrote: This isn't true. These offenses were made on him or her's various accounts. You can't continue a ban for something that never happened on that account.

...

David02 wrote:
Yes it is (Jericho made a comment about it that can only be viewed by site admin/mods)
And rule 2.4 states that "the staff of this forum will determine weather your post was acceptable or not". Supporting a modder who posted porn in one of his accounts was determined unacceptable by Jericho and me.



As it can be seen, Lopezracing was banned for supporting a modder who put porn in his fake mods. He continued after the temporary ban, which was the reason for the longer ban.

Spoutnik wrote: Just because Jericho did it doesn't mean its right.

Okay, assume it wasn't right. His behavior was still unnaceptable (image you're a guest, a guy puts porn in his fake mod, you believe it's real because of Lopezracing, you download it, and you see porn? You will obviously never download mods from here again)

simulationdude wrote:
I agree with Spoutnik though , he definitely should've been banned, it was not a mistake. I don't see what's your problem with that?

About all this fake mod nonsense, I personally think it is really easy to tell if a mod is fake. If no one has posted before and had a poorly-worded post with awful grammar and no pictures or downloads it is so clearly fake. If I created a mod I would try hard to add nice pictures and a well-formatted post to get more people to download my mod I'd spent time on, rather than promising it in ten minutes using the grammar of a four-year old. So when you see a clearly fake mod, ignore it and the troll will go back under its bridge.

Oh, and Lopezracing was clearly either TGIFmodding or one of his/her friends, as no reasonable person would have believed TGIF's parody-levels of lies.

Spoutnik wrote:
It is still not on the rulebook as a crime to support someone, nor is it on the rules to have multiple accounts.

simulationdude wrote:
Okay, but the rule 2.4 states that "the staff of this forum will determine wether your post is acceptable or not". Lopezracing's posts were considered unnaceptable, thus deleted. Furthermore, even though it is not a rule, we have permission to ban a copy of a banned user. Otherwise, what would be the point of a ban?

Stryder: I agree (that's why unknown modders are now required to post pictures)

PS: Kivlov banned Rusiken31 for stealing mods, even through it is not on the rulebook. When something is clearly not right, the user should be banned regardless of the rule book.