it doesn’t matter. If there is a style bashing and fraud busting rule.Then you have to accept what he says on face value.
To clarify the rule ... the rule against fraudbusting doesn't mean that you have to
accept someone's claims at face value. It just means that you don't get to publicly call them out on those claims. You
can ask questions and allow readers to draw their own conclusions.
For example:
If someone comes on the forum and claims to be the 57th grandmaster of the Sasquatch Death Touch Kung Fu school, anointed by the abbott of the East-South-East Shaolin Temple, then you can say "How interesting, I've been studying CMA and Chinese history for the last 30 years and I've never encountered mention of such a school or such a temple. Can you give us more details and point me to some documentation about this temple?" And when they reply "Oh, it was a secret temple hidden in the mountains and no outsiders were allowed to know of its existence," then readers can draw their own conclusions.
If someone comes on the forum and claims to be the winner of a secret no-holds-barred 60 round single-elimination martial arts tournament, then you can say "Would you mind clarifying the tournament structure for me? Because if it worked like a normal single-elimination tournament, then that would imply 2^60 (1,152,921,504,606,847,000) competitors, which would be difficult to keep secret." And based on the response or lack thereof, then readers can draw their own conclusions.
And if someone comes on the forum and claims to have effortlessly won dozens of street fights against multiple armed attackers, we don't get to call them a liar. If that same person then posts videos of themselves in which they appear to have terrible structure, balance, and overall technique ... then the viewers can form their own opinions about the likelihood of that person's stories. Personally I wouldn't bother providing any commentary on the video unless the poster explicitly asked for feedback. In such a case, the video could speak for itself.