Simply put. Log dives are pretty much never resorted to in this kind of complaint - unless it's something quite out of the ordinary. Similarly, the /rn rule, it still exists, however if the user's name is unknown - example being the 2 complaints on "melbot" and such - there's no way of knowing who that really is, which is why we ask. Tl;dr yes, knowing the /rn of someone is important to have Complaints can be dismissed without it, in certain circumstances. If the receiver of the complaint fesses up to the complaint, generally the /rn rule is dismissed, but reminded about.
So if Itz didnt admit it in this complaint, then 7am would have had to provide a /rn screenshot? Just for clarification (And Thanks for Responding <3) @oreo1227
Keep in mind, however, don't abuse the fact someone may not have taken a screenshot of it: Whether that's changed your nickname Take it off after the deal Etc... We still can, and will, do log dives if need be- regardless whether it's often used or not, we still can.
When has a logdive been done? I've never seen them do one. Also, on that same token, I didn't think logs went back very far, so it would be useless to do a logdive.
I used "believe" for lack of a better word at the moment, I was agreeing with you after you stated your point, @Ladyvamptress.
I have seen log posts on complaints where the logs dated back to early 2013... there may even be earlier ones, I don't know.
I've just never seen it. Wouldn't happen to know the "case" that something like that was used? Curious how it would be handled. If not, no biggie. Also, the main reason i wanted GA plus (guess I coulda said SM+) is to prevent the arguement of whether it was a thing or not.
