I wonder if their A/B test showed that this was somehow "solving" the "spam of spam reports" problem. It would be fairy naive but I could envision a world where they tested this out, saw fewer (but more detailed) spam reports and concluded that the prior distribution of spam reports was itself not reliable (e.g overcounted the problem).
This is obviously self-serving but seems like it may at least be a "consistent" world view where they aren't totally cynical.
This is obviously self-serving but seems like it may at least be a "consistent" world view where they aren't totally cynical.