User blog comment:GeoFruck/Discussion on proof of Dino Fusion results/@comment-5042346-20120706155320

I have given my opinion before. I believe we need a format to give proof, but it should not be obligatory. I would find fusion with proof to be more reliable. I would require proof where reported results are unrealistic and disregard entries that are unrealistic without proof (but here we talk about exceptions, like tier jumps or somebody constantly reporting very rare dinos Love Stegosaurus + Love Stegosaurus = XXX).

For this I made the test page. I do not believe it is necessary to have proof always. I do consider that the source may indicate reliability. Therefore I also suggested to keep track of the source. In addition I suggested to have a colour indicator to immediately show the kind of source.

Given the numbers you provide as an example, we would certainly need to think about how to manage the input. Avoid double reporting of the same fusion, avoid misunderstanding of the dinos used, add perhaps relevant information on levels used.

Concluding:


 * Do we need proof in all cases? No


 * Do we need to opportunity to provide proof? Yes


 * Do we need to track and manage the input? Yes