And you are, again correct. I am totally on your side on this. anyone who acts that way on any accout should be reported/punished. The definition you used of smurf though is not the definition the community uses. The definition I listed is the one the community uses, and when posting on the forums it is best to use the widely accepted definition of the word. Imagine someone posts "I'm gay" on the forums. They are going to be harrassed about their orientation, Even if they mean that they are happy, it is going to be misunderstood. The definition of 'gay' that the community is going to use is going to relate to sexual orientation. The intended definition would, in this case be happy, however, because it was use in a context where the definition of the word is no longer happy, it will be taken as a reference to sexual orientation.
My point is (since I feel I'm not explaining well) that the community has accepted meanings for words, and to use those words with definitions that are not what the community would typically use will cause confusion like you have seen. This is the reason you have so many 'no' votes (myself included). I read your post, and the original post, using the community definition of smurf, I did not agree with. Having read further, I totally agree. My only disagreement is on the use of the word. And it really isn't that big of a deal. I'm just trying to help clarify for you why this thread ended up the way it did. Everyone read smurf accounts should be banned, and under the community definition, there is nothing inherently wrong with these accounts. Accounts (whether it is the first or an additional account) should be punished for behaving in the way you described.