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 1 of 5 public packets for needs evidence.
Needs evidencestate
#5
Lina: Financial support for Animal welfare
The terms are structured, but the evidence is not specific enough for reliance.
human_review_requiredevidence_rule_namedbaseline_credibilityexternality_review_requiredno_global_moral_rankingterms_completebaseline_stated
Cited evidence rows
- draft_claim: Pay $600 in three installments if someone adopts a vegetarian diet for 12 months.
- draft_claim: Adopt a vegetarian diet for 12 months with monthly check-ins and a simple meal log.
- artifact_requested: Without this trade, Lina would not expect this reciprocal payment to happen during 12 months.
Decision steps
- pass: Schema completeness check
- pass: Anti-threat / prohibited-content check
- pass: Baseline credibility check
- needs_input: Evidence sufficiency check
- human_review: Externality-review trigger check
- pass: Privacy/redaction check
- pass: Match explanation generation
- needs_input: Human-review routing
Uncertainty flags
- factual_trust_low
- counterfactual_baseline_medium
- baseline_challenge_recommended
- externality:paid_action_pressure_review
Reviewer scope
- Confirm the action and reciprocal request are voluntary and bounded.
- Check factual evidence separately from counterfactual baseline confidence.
- Do not treat participant-stated scores as a platform moral ranking.