Skip to main content
Moral Trade
FeedDiscoverMessagesCommitments
More▾
ProfileCreate a tradeSaved offersInviteHow it worksSafety
Get startedSign in
  1. Home
  2. Reasoning Center
Worked examplesReview methodologySafeguard demonstrationsResearch

Learn · worked examples

Worked-example review notes

Read how example trades are reviewed: factor codes, uncertainty flags, evidence gaps, and possible next steps. This is learning material, not a live review queue, forum, or note editor. Real reviews remain attached to their actual records.

Showing 0 of 5 public packets for blocked.

Standards
All records5Needs evidence1Human review5Blocked0Pass with limits4
Review workflow6 cards6 marketplace factors
Provenance contract10 rulespass sample bundle
Packet contract5 worked examplesdeterministic review output only

No public packets

No blocked records are published yet.

The Reasoning Center only shows deterministic worked-example packets. Live private offers, exact wishes, contact details, and raw source notes stay out of this public index.

Show all recordsReview standards

Review notes

Spec
No hidden ranking

Reasoning summaries should explain explicit factors without implying a platform-wide moral score.

No autonomous outreach

The reasoning workspace can draft checklists, but contact, disclosure, and status changes require consent gates.

No fake certainty

Incomplete records should remain marked as needing input instead of being polished into confident prose.

Packet rules

JSON
  • rule 1Packets expose only structured summaries, cited evidence rows, uncertainty flags, reviewer scope, factor codes, and required next steps.
  • rule 2Packets publish step-by-step decision gates with pass, needs_input, human_review, or blocked statuses before any public reliance.
  • rule 3Packets must not expose chain-of-thought, private wish text, contact details, raw source notes, or autonomous outreach fields.
  • rule 4Packets must preserve no_global_moral_ranking and participant-relative language.
  • rule 5Packets are derived from canonical worked examples; live private offers are not exported.

Open questions

  1. Can offset matching distinguish counterfactual change from already-planned giving?
  2. Which third-party harms should give standing to challenge a private agreement?
  3. When should political-adjacent trades be rejected rather than sandboxed as examples?

Reasoning standards

Separate claims about moral value, evidence quality, counterfactual baselines, and safety boundaries before publishing a trade.

Read standards

Community notices

  • Signed-in drafting and reviewer workflows remain separate from public examples until explicit publication.
  • Public entries should cite factor codes, evidence state, uncertainty, and the next human-controlled step.
Moral Trade

Do more good together.

Offer an action in exchange for an action you value.

Explore

  • Feed
  • Discover
  • Create a trade
  • Messages
  • Commitments

Trust

  • Safety
  • Credibility
  • Transparency
  • Service status

Help

  • How it works
  • Contact

About

  • Team and governance
  • Research
  • Support the project

Moral Trade does not provide legal, tax, investment, or blanket impact certification. Payment, custody, authorization, settlement, and refund capabilities are disclosed at the point where a user could rely on them.

© 2026 Moral Trade

PrivacyTermsAccessibilityContact