Adult consent and permission
Did the submitter confirm they are 18+, have the right to submit the material, and accept the current versioned permission? Ordinary intake is not an exclusive-rights transfer.
18+ private intake · automated screening · human escalation when needed
Every new community submission is private first, then checked for identifying details, permission, safety, and publication risk.
Green can publish. Yellow waits. Red stays private. Safety Red gets priority human review.
What the screen examines
Automated screening combines harmful-content moderation with PC privacy rules. It reduces routine owner review but cannot guarantee every risk will be identified. Ambiguous or urgent material is held for a person.
Did the submitter confirm they are 18+, have the right to submit the material, and accept the current versioned permission? Ordinary intake is not an exclusive-rights transfer.
Could names, exact locations, employers, routes, dates, usernames, plates, faces, addresses, or combinations of details identify someone?
Does the submission allege misconduct, criminal activity, abuse, fraud, or serious wrongdoing? Contributor statements are not treated as independently verified facts.
Does it involve self-harm, violence, threats, child safety, exploitation, abuse, an active emergency, or another issue requiring priority human escalation?
Can the material be used without exposing private people, medical details, or serious harm for entertainment? For Field Notes, is it genuinely useful driver knowledge rather than a pile-on?
Four screening outcomes
The publication boundary
The raw submission stays private. Public feeds and the public Vault receive only sanitized material allowed by the applicable consent. PC may generalize, redact, hold, reject, restrict, unpublish, or remove material rather than expose a person.
Safety and privacy outrank speed. If the system is uncertain, the submission stays held.