I absolutely reported a rules infraction when I was over there nearly forty years ago.
Glad I reported it, unfortunately there wasn’t sufficient evidence to do anything about it.
No embarrassment about what I reported and I would do the same today.
You are apparently inferring that I would disapprove of reporting a rules-infraction. I was merely wondering why the accuser wasn't identified by name.
Seems only fair that if the name of the accused can be dragged through the gutter, then the name of the "meritorious comrade" who denounced him should likewise be publicized.
Regards,
By the way: What was the nature of the rules-infraction that you reported nearly 40 years ago? Did someone steal a quart of strawberries?