Please, teach me about my errors instead of being so picky
I answered in that way because, since we were talking about that, I though that you were implying that the fact that setting the relationship as tenant shouldn't trigger the ban beacuse the children wouldn't be MC's sons, instead, from what I seem to understand from your non-explanatory response, your comment was related solely to the fact that relationships can be set up at will, without however having anything to do with the ban the rest of us were talking about, so just correcting the statement of the other guy, am I right?