The point is both are reasonable explanations, and without further data, it's hard to say with certainty it's one or the other.
The parent commenter was absolutely trying to dismiss the core of the story by injecting an alternate reality into it.
> If they're not equally likely, I'm sure you'll have no problem demonstrating that?
The situation I'm referring to was not a simple reporting change. It involved employees quitting over bullying, and in one case there were issues severe enough that law enforcement became involved.
So, not, it was not a simple case of people reporting things differently. These problems did not exist pre-WFH at this company.
But if you're dead set on finding ways to reject this and substitute your own reality, I suspect even this won't convince you.
I really don't know why you're so aggressive. You did not include the context in your original comment that you did with this one, and so someone put forward a very reasonable explanation as to why reports may have went up.
I don't think you can generalize that to other companies or even other departments at your company.