Community Standards
Maximum lawful expression. Minimum necessary intervention.
These standards describe WrektView's moderation principles. They are designed to be viewpoint-neutral: rules address conduct, applicable law, and platform integrity rather than which side of a lawful debate a person takes.
Lawful expression is presumed permissible
WrektView is built for disagreement. A lawful opinion does not become a violation because it is unpopular, offensive, politically controversial, critical of an institution, contrary to consensus, bullish, bearish, satirical, or uncomfortable to read.
When WrektView may intervene
WrektView may restrict content, conduct, accounts, or access when reasonably necessary to comply with applicable law, respond to valid legal process, protect people from direct unlawful harm, or preserve the security and integrity of the service.
- Credible unlawful threats or unlawful incitement where the applicable law requires action.
- Sexual exploitation of minors and other legally prohibited exploitative material.
- Fraud, phishing, credential theft, malware, or malicious technical abuse.
- Unlawful disclosure or solicitation of legally protected private information.
- Legally sufficient intellectual-property notices or other binding legal obligations.
- Impersonation, spam, automated abuse, or deliberate interference with the service.
- Manipulation of Calls or reputation through fake or coordinated accounts, exploit abuse, fabricated or backdated Call history, unauthorized record alteration, or automation primarily intended to manufacture rankings or reputation.
Calls and reputation integrity
Calls and reputation exist to create an honest public record of market opinions. Do not manipulate that record. Creating or coordinating fake accounts to manufacture reputation, using multiple accounts to boost or protect a score, exploiting bugs in Calls or scoring, falsifying or erasing Call history, unauthorizedly modifying records, or automating activity primarily to manipulate rankings may result in enforcement.
Normal disagreement, following another person’s thesis, making similar market Calls, being wrong, being offensive, or changing your mind is not automatically manipulation. Enforcement targets deceptive conduct and system abuse, not viewpoints.
Narrow enforcement
When action is required, WrektView's policy is to prefer the narrowest reasonable measure capable of addressing the problem. A specific unlawful item should not be used as a pretext to suppress an unrelated topic, account, or viewpoint when a narrower response is reasonably available.
Due process and transparency
Material enforcement should have an identifiable rule or legal basis. Where legally and operationally possible, WrektView should explain what action was taken and why. Hidden ideological rules and unexplained viewpoint penalties are contrary to the platform's stated mission.
International freedom of information
WrektView supports a strong international principle that people should be free to seek, receive, publish, and exchange information and ideas across borders. This is an advocacy position and product commitment, not a claim that every jurisdiction currently provides identical legal rights.
Reports are not votes
A large number of complaints does not by itself make lawful speech prohibited. Reports are signals for review; enforcement should turn on the rule or legal basis, not the popularity of the speaker or viewpoint.