Maritime Compensation Index

Moderation Policy

Last updated: 20 June 2026

Document version: 2026.1

Back home

This policy explains how submissions are reviewed, how approval and rejection are recorded, and which moderation details are kept for internal audit only.

Review before approval

Every submission is reviewed before it can be approved. Reviewers check the submission for privacy, consistency, and fit with the platform's data model before it appears in public analytics.

Approved submissions are stamped with the moderation version, review time, and approved status so the audit trail stays complete.

Approval workflow

When a moderator approves a submission, the system automatically records review status as approved, sets the review timestamp, and stores the current moderation version.

A review reason is optional on approval and remains empty unless the moderator chooses to add one.

Rejection workflow

When a moderator rejects a submission, the system automatically records review status as rejected, sets the review timestamp, and stores the current moderation version.

A review reason is required for rejection and can be a suggested reason or free text.

  • duplicate
  • incomplete
  • unrealistic
  • inconsistent
  • spam
  • abusive
  • suspected manipulation
  • invalid employer
  • invalid vessel information
  • other

Duplicate detection and employer normalization

Duplicate detection helps identify repeated or near-duplicate records so the public benchmarks are not skewed by the same underlying report being submitted more than once.

Employer names are normalized so that the same company is grouped consistently across submissions, even when users write the name in slightly different ways.

Internal moderation metadata

Review status, review timestamps, review reasons, and moderation version values are used for moderation and audit purposes only.

These fields are not shown on public APIs, company pages, explorer responses, or benchmark responses.

Approval is not absolute proof

Approval means a submission passed review and was judged suitable for inclusion, but it does not guarantee absolute accuracy.

Public benchmarks remain estimates based on voluntary anonymous reports.