There are certainly many valid suggestions that can be made regarding in-game moderation and the reporting system. It's true that improvements are possible. However, my point - what you referred to as a "catch-all response" - is simply that lowering the recruitment standards even further, as is being suggested here, is not a viable solution. And that is very substantial as I have been directly involved in the recruiting process for four years, so I know what the recruiting standards are and where they come from, and I know what strategic and managerial considerations lie behind them. This discussion tends to resurface whenever people are frustrated with the outcome of their own application. Often, the focus is more on personal disappointment rather than the broader needs of the team and community. As long as TruckersMP continues to meet the Game Moderation recruitment targets set by management, there's no need to consider lowering the standards. The potential applicants are out there - but it's also important to remember that every new staff member needs to be properly trained and led. I still believe the reporting system functions well overall. Even if a Game Moderator isn't immediately available in-game, we have a reliable web reporting system where reports are reviewed and addressed in a timely manner. Realistically, it's impossible to process every single in-game report as it happens. That would require thousands of Game Moderators working around the clock - which is simply not feasible. So I ask again: to achieve that kind of coverage, just how far should we lower the recruitment standards, in your opinion?
I hope this meets your expectations. I know it's easy to judge a topic like this from the outside perspective, and gets more and more complicated when being substantiated.