I'm sorry you disagree, but that rule is there to prevent people from joining, breaking the rules and claiming it was their sibling, cousin, etc and using that as an excuse to bypass the ban. You don't know how many times I've had people try to pull that over the years and after they realize it's not going to work, finally admit it was actually them who broke the rules and not someone else. That rule isn't going to be reconsidered to prevent that. As far as shared responsibility goes, in the real world if you have a computer that is yours at work and you walk off, leaving it unlocked and some customer comes by and steals private information off said computer, who is going to get the blame by the company? I will give you a hint, it won't be the customer.