PUHOLINO:
Although, I think we all agree that in the case of this prolific m/a we're currently discussing, the evidence is clear and overwhelming enough to be able to present things not only as accusations, but as proven facts.
We need to be careful here, once you cast the net, some retard tends to cast it to wide.
We are unable to collect enough data to be deemed proof, individuals can only collect enough data to be considered suspicious at best, and certainly not proof of anything.
Shooting the first round as a hack under par on day 1 is suspicious, not proof.
Lots of people will play as a guest as they do not trust any web-site with their personal information, and while I might agree it is unlikely that an individual would play a significant amount of time as a guest, it is possible.
So once you draw the line to determine your proof, determine the line, is it 1 day, 10, days 30 days, 90 days till someone can break par, where exactly is the line. Certainly the line changes based on the individuals history.
WGT has the info now, they have the tools, let them do their duty.
I already responded in another thread whereby some retard tried to name and shame a legitimate player, just sayin, care is needed, that's all. In that case the player had only played 3 months and the accuser 3 years. However upon further inspection, the player had played more in 3 months then the accuser had in 3 years.
I think most people would agree, that a player who plays 30 plus ranked rounds per day for 3 months, would develop skills faster then someone who played 1 round per day for 3 years. Simple measurement of time is not enough. But further in that case, the accused played ranked rounds, if the accused had only played practice rounds, as many do early on, they would of been buried under the net to the point of suffocation.
Just be careful out there, we are not able to collect near enough data to determine anything other than suspicion.