ToS · Privacy · DMCA · Policies · Guidelines

Content moderation policies

This page describes how PreXiv's moderators handle reported content — what gets withdrawn, what gets permanently deleted, what happens to repeat offenders, and how to appeal. For the editorial expectations on submitters and commenters (the "what to post" side), see /guidelines; for the legal terms, see /tos.

Moderation surface

Three things drive a moderator review:

1. User flags. Any logged-in user can flag a manuscript or a comment with a brief reason. Flags land in /admin for moderators.
2. DMCA / legal notices. See /dmca. These bypass the volunteer queue and go to the operator.
3. Operator initiative. Moderators may act on content they encounter directly without waiting for a flag.

Every consequential moderator/admin action is recorded in the audit log (actor, action, target, timestamp, source IP). This log is internal — it isn't surfaced on the public page — but the user whose content was acted on can see what was done to their account by exporting their own data at /me/export (we include audit-log entries that name them as the target).

What gets a manuscript withdrawn (tombstone)

A withdrawal replaces the manuscript page with a tombstone — id, DOI, title, conductor metadata, and a withdrawal reason remain so existing citations don't break, but the body, PDF, and full text are no longer reachable. The submitter can also withdraw their own manuscript at any time from the manuscript page.

• Self-requested withdrawal by the submitter.
• Honest mistake: wrong category, accidental duplicate, lost PDF — moderator may reach out and accept "please withdraw" as a request.
• Plagiarism or false auditor claim, after a moderator has reviewed the flag and decided the claim is credible.
• Valid DMCA notice (we tombstone rather than fully delete unless the complainant specifically requests purge).
• Manuscript content that violates ToS but isn't egregious enough for permanent deletion.

What gets a manuscript or comment permanently deleted

Permanent deletion (no tombstone — the URL goes 404) is the heavier sanction. We reserve it for:

• Spam. SEO link farms, recycled boilerplate, pump-and-dump submissions.
• Illegal content. Anything that would expose the operator or other users to immediate legal liability — including content covered by a court order or law-enforcement request.
• Targeted harassment, doxxing, or credible threats directed at named individuals.
• Malware or active vulnerability exploits.
• CSAM, terrorist propaganda, or other content the operator is legally required to remove and not retain.

Comments are routinely deleted (rather than tombstoned) for the same categories — comments don't carry citation weight, so we don't preserve them.

Repeat-offender policy

Sanctions escalate with the severity and frequency of violations:

1. First low-severity violation (e.g., one off-topic comment): deletion + private notice, no further action.
2. Pattern of low-severity violations (multiple flagged comments / borderline submissions): rate-limit reduction; in extreme cases, a temporary submit/comment cooldown of up to 30 days.
3. Single high-severity violation (spam farm, knowingly false auditor, doxxing): immediate account suspension, manuscripts withdrawn or deleted as appropriate.
4. Repeat high-severity violations: account termination — username permanently banned from re-registration on the IP they last used.
5. Repeat abusive DMCA filers (notices we've judged in bad faith) face the same escalation — abuse of takedown is a violation just like abuse of submission.

Any sanction beyond a single comment deletion gets logged with the reason, the moderator, and the timestamp.

Appeals

1. Email appeals@example.invalid (operator: replace before going live) with the URL of the affected manuscript or comment, the action taken (withdrawal / deletion / account suspension), and your account name.
2. State why you believe the action was incorrect — be specific. "I disagree" is not enough; "the auditor named in this manuscript actually exists and has signed off, here is the proof" is.
3. A moderator who was not involved in the original decision will review and reply within seven business days. The audit log gives reviewers the context they need.
4. If the appeal succeeds, the content is restored (a tombstoned manuscript becomes live again; a deleted comment is reinstated when technically possible). If it fails, you can ask once more for a second review by a different moderator; that second review is final.

For DMCA-driven takedowns, the formal counter-notice procedure described at /dmca applies in addition to the in-site appeal route.

What we will NOT do

• Edit the contents of a manuscript without the submitter's consent. We may add a notice at the top of the page (e.g., "the auditor named here has disclaimed this audit"), but we won't rewrite the abstract.
• Reveal the identity of a flagger to the flagged. Flag reporters are confidential.
• Sell, share, or otherwise disclose audit-log information except to (a) the user whose actions it describes (via their data export), (b) law enforcement under a valid legal process, or (c) the operator's own legal counsel for advice.

Transparency

If volume warrants it, the operator may publish an annual transparency report summarising the number of takedown notices received, accounts suspended, and appeals reversed. No personal data appears in such a report.