We have quite a few questions on why visas got refused. I don't think we've ever taken a stance on this, but I feel this is a category of questions which should be closed as a standard.
My rationale is the most visa refusals - as long as all requirements are technically met, i.e., all documentation asked for is submitted, proof of funds given et al are all very dependent on the individual situation / risk profile of a person as assessed by a visa officer. It's a subjective and opaque process that is up to the discretion of a visa officer.
It could be because somebody's risk profile is high (very subjective), how an application behaved in a visa interview (which we don't know about), the mood the visa officer was on a given day (who knows)...
Hence, I feel that questions about why a visa got refused are subjective and opinion-based and should be closed. What do people think?