To Vigo or not to Vigo? That is the question.

To determine guilt or innocence, one confirmed violation is sufficient. That's why I chose the statement that is 100% true. All other points can be debated at length (which is already happening over 25 pages), discussing whether the person is good or not, etc. But for me, one fact of a rule violation is enough.

Well, then you simply must file an appeal to the Arbitration Committee regarding the decision on Loser and Vitalik. There, too, there are no 100% facts of their guilt, if you reason in a similar way. For example, with Loser, there is a video, yes, that's great, but did anyone check it for editing? - I doubt it. Okay, let's assume the video is not edited; Loser can always say that someone else was at the computer and opened the saves. Based on your logic and that of several other commenters, there are also no 100% facts there. Do you understand how absurd all of this can become?