Hello there,
I've been reading reports for a while now and it appears to me that some reports get declined, when, in my opinion, they really shouldnt be. They get declined because there is insufficient evidence against the player. However, the evidence that IS shown, clearly shows the reported player in question doing something which they could be punished for. I don't think I'm the only one who gets pretty confused/annoyed by this.
I don't think it's necessary to, for example, have exactly 4+ screenshots and video evidence when it's clear that the user is playing against the rules in 2 of the screenshots provided.
Could be that I'm missing something, idk lemme know
