How to Read the Evidence on a Report

01Report count is the weakest number on the page

It is the largest, the easiest to read, and the one that deserves the least of your attention on its own. Ten reports describing one incident are still one incident, and a single detailed report with transaction records can be worth more than a dozen that say only that something felt wrong.

Read it as a measure of how much material exists, not of how likely something is to be true. The numbers beside it are what qualify it.

02Independent reports are the one that matters

This is why the independent count is shown separately rather than folded into the total. Reports from unconnected people carry far more weight than several from one source, because the thing that is hard to fabricate is agreement between strangers.

Two independent accounts converging on the same method and naming the same identifier is the strongest ordinary signal available. A high total with an independent count of one is a much weaker record than the headline suggests, and reading the two together is the single most useful habit on these pages.

03Evidence strength, and what it is measuring

Evidence strength is about the quality of the material, not the quantity of reports. Submitted material is not automatically counted as verified evidence — that distinction is the whole reason the measure exists.

• Whether there is anything checkable: transaction records, receipts, full conversation threads, rather than a description alone.
• Whether the accounts are consistent with each other on method, wording and identifiers.
• Whether reports are specific — an exact identifier, a date and an amount — or general.
• How recent the material is, so a profile reflects current activity rather than a closed episode.

Confidence sits alongside it and expresses how settled the picture is overall. A high risk rating with low confidence is a real state, and it means what it says: concerning, and not yet firm.

04What the evidence itself shows

The free layer of a profile shows you that evidence exists and how much of it there is; the material itself — screenshots, receipts, chat logs — is behind the app. That is a deliberate line rather than an accident of packaging, and it cuts both ways: it is how the platform is funded, and it also means evidence about a named identifier is not sitting open on the public web for anyone to lift.

What the count alone still tells you is useful. Three pieces of evidence across two independent reports is a different record from zero pieces across nine, and you can read that difference without opening anything.

05Reading a thin record honestly

Some profiles are thin, and the page does not hide it. A single report with no evidence is one person's account, and it should be read as exactly that — which is also why an entry like that is not offered to search engines at all.

06What none of it is

• It is not a legal finding. No status here carries legal weight, and this platform is not a law-enforcement agency, court or regulator.
• It is not fixed. A status reflects the material at review time, and new reports or a successful correction can change it.
• It is not about a person. The record is about an identifier, which may have been spoofed, reassigned or impersonated.
• It is not a decision. It is what has been reported and how well supported it is; what you do about that is yours.