Sneaky algorithm

I am not missing the difference between evidence and proof, are you? The only "proof" would be to get a look at the code.  All of the rest is evidence.  I'm differentiating between "evidence" and "legitimate evidence".  To me, "I wanted a thing and it wasn't there" is not legitimate evidence, because no attempt was ever made to reproduce the experiment with a control that could possibly dead end the argument.  However, I did.  And what I found was that it's just as easy to not get items I didn't need.  To me, that ruins the credibility of the first argument, because if the behavior is just as common with an undesirable item as with a desirable item, then the claim that it's a rigged system because desirable items are more often hidden is no longer legitimate evidence.

As for the "thin skin" comment and the suggestions that I don't understand simple language, I'll reiterate: assuming an attack posture is unnecessary.  We can be civil to each other and not agree.