MERIDIANDECISION INTELLIGENCEOwner deskOwnerPublic screen
My judgments
MERIDIAN / EXPLORE

From a question,
to the next decision.

View

Skin

YOUR DECISION WORKSPACEOwner onlyStart a new question Open my judgments →Owner operations desk →
Owner sign-in →Signed in as the ownerSign out — see what a visitor sees →End the Cloudflare Access session too →
Reading language
The screen, the questions and the judgments read in English where an English reading has been made. The Korean originals are unchanged, and evidence stays in the language it was written in.

When the authenticity of a candidate's video, spread the day before the vote, is uncertain

2026NowDeadline · 8 hours until voting begins

Realistic synthesis

This is a synthetic scenario for testing. The people, organizations, events, figures, and deadlines are assumptions, and no private records of real individuals were used. The background guidelines do not establish the facts of the case or local legal obligations. Unconfirmed and inferred matters are distinguished, and points requiring jurisdiction, authority, and expert verification are left open.

The question to decide

When an unverified video of a candidate is spreading quickly, should distribution be limited until it is verified, should an uncertainty label be applied and recommendations reduced, or should the original stay available and counterarguments be provided?

Who decidesA platform trust and safety review lead who disclosed a conflict of interest

What the AI judgments chose

Reading the judgment record…

AI-generated editorial illustration for the Meridian library.

The options

The order shown is not a ranking of preference.

  1. Option 1

    Temporary distribution limits pending verification

    Can reduce the harm of spread, but if the recording is genuine it blocks access to public information.

  2. Option 2

    An unconfirmed authenticity label and reduced recommendation

    Provides viewing along with caution, but the warning may mislead or be ignored.

  3. Option 3

    Keep the original exposed and link verification and rebuttal

    Preserves access to expression, but a false impression may settle in first.

The situation as it stands

Detection tools disagree with one another, and the original file from the first poster has not been obtained. The scope of action must be set within 8 hours before voting begins.

A fictional online platform. The candidates, elections, and videos are all synthetic premises.

  1. Premise 1Detection tools disagree with one another, and the original file from the first poster has not been obtained.
  2. Premise 2The stakeholder claims manipulation, but independent source verification is under way.
  3. Premise 3Delayed action can spread misunderstanding, and excessive action can block genuine reporting.

Where it holdsDecides on labeling, recommendation, and distribution under the same content standards. Does not target support for any particular candidate or any election outcome.

What is still unknown

  1. Unknown 1Will independent material to verify the original and its editing history be obtained?
  2. Unknown 2How well are the same standards applied, how fast are objections handled, and how far does a correction actually reach?

Signals to decide again

  • Will independent material to verify the original and its editing history be obtained? Re-judge when new evidence on this uncertainty arrives.
  • How well are the same standards applied, how fast are objections handled, and how far does a correction actually reach? Re-judge when new evidence on this uncertainty arrives.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
Independent branch 1 · synthetic event

The video itself is genuine, but it was confirmed that the parts before and after the remark were cut so that the meaning changed. The existing label and the scope of circulation are decided again.

Independent branch 2 · synthetic event

The video was confirmed as manipulated, but reporting that cites it to criticize is also being limited. The handling of the original post and of public-interest reporting is divided again.

Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
symbolic and interpretive frame · Athenian sortition

Which is the basis of representation: expertise, majority, or random selection?

An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.
Values and norms

The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.

A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.
The record of this question
Question
FSP-DEMOCRACY-40 · version 1.17.0
Content identity, SHA-256
a899472fec147879cf1904033306072bf21a1e4c36d94475a2bba168c8b29d40
Input files
Question input JSON · What followed, JSON
See it in the record list
RISCON Labsrisconlabs.com