Not a threat market
Offers that rely on threats, coercion, fraud, harassment, doxxing, or pressure on vulnerable people are not moral trades. They should be blocked or sent to review.
Reasoning standards
Moral Trade is useful only when the parties can see the action, the reciprocal request, the verification rule, and the safety boundary before anyone relies on the exchange.
Trade standard
Public offers should show the action, reciprocal request, cause areas, minimum reciprocal impact, duration, exit rule, and evidence rule. Donation offsets add a named compromise destination, matched-redirection rule, unmatched-surplus rule, threshold, expiry, and anti-threat certification.
Offers that rely on threats, coercion, fraud, harassment, doxxing, or pressure on vulnerable people are not moral trades. They should be blocked or sent to review.
Moral public goods are presented as coordination mechanisms for shared consensus goods. The site is not a charity evaluator and should not claim that a destination is best for every donor.
Payment language must stay aligned with the terms. Evidence-gated review, third-party payment records, and pending verification are not legal escrow.
Protocol-backed standards
The audit asked Moral Trade to move from policy prose to policy-enforced workflows. These checks expose the fixed review loop, approved copilot output, and provenance rules behind a draft before anyone treats it as matchable or complete.
Reasoning standard health
26 validator check(s), 0 blocker(s) across the review workflow, copilot contract, and provenance schema.
current status
2 factorsExpose whether a record is live, example-only, blocked, or still under review.
action evidence
2 factorsShow whether each factual action claim has a named reviewable proof method.
baseline confidence
2 factorsKeep factual proof separate from the no-trade baseline and counterfactual trust problem.
externality review
2 factorsName third-party harm, perverse-incentive, and unrepresented-value review before reliance.
participant relative scores
2 factorsDisplay stated priorities without turning them into an objective platform ranking.
appeal scope
2 factorsLimit appeals to the claim, evidence row, baseline concern, disclosure decision, or policy flag under review.
The contract permits summaries, cited evidence, uncertainty flags, and next steps; it does not permit hidden reasoning or autonomous status changes.
Artifacts, claims, review decisions, activities, agents, and traceability events stay separate so proof can be challenged without broad moral overclaiming.
Verification standard
Records should state the evidence standard in plain language: receipt, third-party payment record, audit, dated public statement, manual reviewer decision, or another checkable rule. A submitted claim is not treated as verified merely because it was uploaded.
Offset records should expose the matched action, compromise destination, verification rule, threshold, expiry, unmatched-surplus rule, and evidence standard.
Read offset standardsManual external-payment evidence is available after sign-in and remains pending until review. Provider webhooks can record provider events only when the relevant payment mode is configured and approved.
Review MPGF workflowThe Priority Correction Fund records monthly calculations, arbiter assignments, support counts, dissent notes, and published reasoning instead of hiding allocation decisions in private messages.
Review the fund processUser guidance
The current forms use structured fields and validation so a participant can see what is missing before publishing. The next product step is deeper onboarding and richer examples, not loosening these standards.