Moderation Policy

Eligible listings and independent speech

ORP accepts eligible businesses/websites, movies and adults with a legitimate public or professional presence. It does not invite profiles targeting private children or ordinary private individuals. Listing a subject does not imply participation, endorsement or wrongdoing. Reviews and replies are their authors’ opinions and claims. Publication, popularity, votes and badges are not findings that those claims are true.

Report, correct or appeal

Anyone may use Report content or a privacy concern without claiming a profile. Identify the exact page or item, the relevant statements, why they concern you and the correction or action requested. Include relevant public sources and dates; do not send unrelated personal data. The form creates a private case reference and access key for progress, explanations, additional information and appeals. Keep the key confidential. Contact ORP is the alternative when the form fails.

Fair and proportionate decisions

A report is a request for review, not proof of a violation. Negative opinions and lawful criticism are not removed merely because a subject objects. ORP may seek clarification, request evidence, temporarily restrict content, correct profile facts, redact passages or remove prohibited content after reviewing context. Payment and representative status do not buy control of reviews or favorable decisions. A reviewer or affected subject may request reconsideration.

Priority and serious allegations

Threats, exposed private information and minors have the highest complaint priority. Mistaken identity, impersonation and serious factual allegations receive elevated attention. Text-screening signals request human review; they do not prove wrongdoing or automatically remove criticism. A moderator may temporarily hide material while investigating. If material claims are found insufficiently supported, the unsubstantiated-review action hides the review and preserves its moderation record privately instead of leaving the allegations public with only the stars excluded.

Reasons, preservation and review

Moderators record the applicable rule, reasoning and proportionate action. Case explanations must not disclose private evidence or unrelated third-party details. Redaction keeps an encrypted original in the restricted case history; restoration is a separate human decision and cannot override another case’s active restriction. The administrative queue shows unresolved cases by priority and age. ORP publishes no guaranteed response deadline in this revision; case status is available through the private reference/key. This service is not an emergency channel.

Review notices and recorded decisions

Each review carries an author-account notice. Publication and email verification do not establish the accuracy of factual claims. A moderator may add a notice that factual claims were not independently verified or that specific statements are disputed; a disputed notice requires an actual recorded dispute. Notices do not authorize publication. Serious allegations require human assessment of the full text, relevant support and context. Moderators record their reasons and can hold a review, request information or revisions, approve the assessed version or reject it. Material changes require reassessment. A temporary hold or a lack of documents does not establish falsity.