Explore

Reviewer & Legal Workflows

This section describes the internal workflows used by reviewers and legal reviewers to ensure that all ClearTrace outputs are accurate, defensible, and responsibly governed. These workflows protect contributors, safeguard against misuse, and maintain the integrity of published findings.

⁠

Moderation Queue

All submissions enter a moderation queue prior to verification or publication.

The moderation queue is used to:

triage incoming cases and evidence

identify incomplete or inadmissible submissions

flag legal, safety, or sensitivity risks

route items to appropriate reviewers

Items may be:

advanced for verification

returned to contributors for clarification

escalated for legal review

archived if they do not meet admissibility standards

No submission bypasses moderation.

⁠

Source Classification

Each evidence item is classified based on source quality and corroboration status.

ClearTrace uses three primary classifications:

Primary — official records, court filings, regulatory actions, contracts, or first-hand documentation

Secondary — investigative journalism, NGO reports, academic research, or verified third-party analysis

Uncorroborated — testimony or claims not yet supported by independent verification

Classification is applied by reviewers and may be updated as additional evidence becomes available. Only verified primary or corroborated secondary sources inform public outputs and guardrail decisions.

⁠

Scoring Methodology

Scoring is applied only after evidence verification and classification.

Scores are derived from:

severity and scope of documented harm

recurrence across time or cases

resistance to remediation or corrective action

systemic entanglement across governance, supply chains, or policy influence

Scoring is non-comparative and non-ranking. It functions as a contextual signal to inform governance decisions, not as a reputational score or legal determination. Reviewers document scoring rationale and reference underlying evidence for auditability.

⁠

Legal Review Thresholds

Legal review is required prior to publication when one or more of the following conditions are met:

allegations involve criminal, civil, or regulatory exposure

named individuals are included

ongoing litigation or active investigations are referenced

testimony carries elevated retaliation or safety risk

public disclosure may present defamation or liability concerns

Legal reviewers assess:

accuracy and defensibility of claims

appropriate language and framing

redaction requirements

publication timing and scope

Legal review does not suppress verified evidence, but ensures that disclosures are responsible, precise, and compliant.

⁠

Redaction & Disclosure

ClearTrace applies redaction to balance transparency with safety and legal responsibility.

Redaction may include:

removal of identifying details for protected contributors

omission of sensitive personal data

delayed disclosure of ongoing legal matters

partial publication of evidence summaries rather than full documents

Disclosure decisions are guided by:

evidentiary confidence

contributor consent

risk of harm or retaliation

public interest and governance relevance

All redactions are logged and reviewable, preserving auditability without exposing sensitive information.

⁠

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ··· in the right corner or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.