1. The two findings
Spine Found
Qualifying, documented public support for the protest, affected athletes, stated demands, accountability, or a directly connected issue was found within the review window.
No Spine Found
No qualifying public support was documented during the stated review window, or the material located was too vague, unrelated, unverifiable, or misleading to qualify.
“No Spine Found” is not proof of opposition, silence in private, or a complete account of someone’s values. It describes the public record we reviewed.
2. Eligible subjects
Profiles are limited to public figures whose work, office, platform, audience, or public role makes commentary on their public conduct reasonably relevant. Private individuals are out of scope.
3. Qualifying evidence
- A public post or video from a verified or reliably attributable account.
- A recorded interview, speech, performance, press statement, or public appearance.
- Reputable reporting that quotes or documents the person’s conduct.
- Corroborated archival material where the original has been deleted.
Anonymous screenshots, edited clips without context, rumours, private messages, synthetic media, and unattributed claims do not qualify by themselves.
4. Review window
Every published finding should identify the period reviewed. Editors consider whether the statement was timely, direct, attributable, relevant, and still publicly accessible. Newer evidence may change a finding.
5. Review process
- A named community member or editor submits a figure and primary evidence.
- A reviewer checks identity, source, date, context, image rights, and duplicates.
- An administrator applies one of the two findings with a factual explanation.
- The profile is published with evidence, attribution, and a correction route.
- Additional evidence, appeals, expired links, and grievances are reviewed in separate queues.
6. Editorial finding versus public vote
The editorial finding reflects the documented evidence review. Community voting reflects visitor opinion. The community-selected feature is ranked by valid “Spine Found” votes, but votes do not automatically override evidence or the editorial finding.
7. Conflicts and fairness
Moderators should disclose material conflicts, avoid reviewing close personal or professional associates, and record consequential changes. Subjects and authorized representatives receive the same correction route as any other person, without preferential treatment.
8. Updates and removals
Findings may be corrected, reversed, annotated, or removed when evidence changes, attribution fails, a source is manipulated, publication creates disproportionate harm, or law requires action. Significant decisions should remain visible in the audit history available to administrators.