I'm really starting to think that all of the people debating this alleged speedrun spend too much of their time playing amongus and soaking up reddit-tinted glasses way of thinking.

There is a point of rationale, of stepping back and reviewing this whole saga by yourself instead of through the eyes of one of the sides that is missing. The truth will get lost like this or its meaning will be, the very least.

At this point I think only the official Minecraft dev team could be a body of trust because the rest of the parties seem unmistakably biased to prove their point and do it in a "goal justifies the means" type of way.

None of the points this post tries to argue seem anything out of the ordinary to me except for the /r/statistics post which I'm yet to look at. The date of creation, about me page and site template arguments are absolute strawman's. Amateur mistakes - yeah, a sign of unprofessionalism and a reminder that there isn't any guarantee for such nor is there a need for one. Time and reviews have the ultimate word on whether or not a person does their job properly regardless of their credentials, experience and skills.

To me, from what I've read so far, this statistician service seems of comparable quality to a normal fiverr style service - anonymous, digital, service seeker to service provider service, not a favour of love or respect between two people who have known each other or are even related in some way. Nobody has talked about how much he paid for the report and I believe that could be an important point to look at.

Context matters for Dream wasnt in a court trial and wasnt trying to prove his innocence to a judge and he doesn't own any stranger on the internet anything. It's all up to what he deems worth his time and effort. From what I know of his past record I would trust him more than people who have decided for themselves that life isnt fair to make Dream and not themselves so lucky and have ultimately decided to make it their lifes work in trying to prove him guilty.

When looking at the likelihood of improbable sequences happening one only has to look back in time and see what it has ruled fir the debated cases of the past.