Basically the rule was overturned in this case for public policy reasons. If a character is destroyed past use we will most likely reimburse to take away the incentive of destroying characters.
It is very ironic to see people calling for more blood. The man got a break from his toon, publicly berated and had a revert done that lost him a couple of weeks work on the character.
There will always be extreme situations that deserve an exception to the rule. That is what makes the law human and not just rote. Giving Tao a hard time for this one seems pretty insane to me given the anger that came out of the codification of the pug rules.
100% fair and reasonable, but the reason people are a bit upset about this still hasn't been addressed.
Most people who play this game understand that it's unfair that someone can level up without doing any work on their own. In-game, we call it "leeching" experience when you sit AFK in a group and contribute nothing, yet you take advantage of the game mechanics to allow you to get experience anyway.
While we all take advantage of this from time to time, most people have a sense of justice which says that we ought to be rewarded for our hard work, and should not be rewarded for not doing any work.
Silo's action in this case took leeching to an extreme: he wanted to gain free experience not just from being AFK in a group, not just from allowing his friends and guildies to play his character, but from having the entire server level up his toon any time he's not using it. By announcing in a public channel his intent to abuse this aspect of SoD's game mechanics, he displayed either an unprecedented arrogance or a complete lack of awareness of the sensibilities of other players. Like many other people, I put a lot of work into my toon, and it seems really unfair to me that someone can potentially get hours of xp into their toon daily without doing ANY work at all.
Nwaij posted earlier that he thinks the only problem someone should have with giving out their account information to anyone and everyone are the consequences to their toon. If that's the case, then the results of this case show that there will be no consequences to giving your account information to anyone and everyone, because that would give people incentive to do bad things to your account.
The offense itself has not even been addressed in all of this, focusing instead on the issue of whether one is responsible for taking advantage of built-in security features. If anyone's "calling for blood," it's only because Silo's action in publicly releasing his account information so people could level his toon up was truly offensive to many people's sense of fair play.