Different content needs different context
- Reports and replies
Written accounts describe what someone says happened. A published report is not an independently verified finding about a number’s owner. Research and call-screener observations also have separate collection and review workflows.
- Government complaint records
FTC and FCC panels summarize consumer filings from agency datasets. Both agencies say these records contain unverified information. The source is official; the allegation is not a government determination of wrongdoing.
- Safety guides and The Hangup
Our guides explain practical options. The Hangup covers scam-related stories and developments. These articles should identify their sources and separate established facts from allegations, advice, and uncertainty.
Sources: FTC · FCC / Data.gov
How public submissions are screened
Reports and replies submitted through our public forms go through automated checks. Not every published submission is read by a person before it appears.
Validate and clean the submission
The service checks required fields, length, duplicate submissions, and abuse limits. Text sanitization removes markup and links and redacts certain patterns, including email addresses and long digit strings. It cannot reliably catch every piece of personal information.
Check for content-policy concerns
An AI moderation service looks for threats, harassment, sensitive information, and other policy problems. A clean result can publish automatically. This is a suitability check—not a fact-check of the caller, the conversation, or the allegation.
Hold uncertain submissions for review
Borderline or violating results stay unpublished for review, as do submissions whose automated check fails. Review tools let an administrator approve or reject a report and hide or remove a reply.
Describe the call, not a private person
Negative experiences and criticism can be useful. The aim is to keep the description specific, relevant, and safe to publish—not to require a positive opinion.
- Explain what the caller claimed, requested, or did. Distinguish what you observed from what you suspect.
- Leave out private names, home addresses, account details, passwords, and verification codes.
- Do not post threats, hateful abuse, harassment, or information intended to expose a private person.
- Avoid advertising, unrelated links, and repeated copies of the same report.
Our standard for articles and guides
Safety guidance should link to primary sources such as agency advice, carrier instructions, and device documentation. Steps should state relevant device, version, provider, or regional limits instead of promising an option works everywhere.
For news, our publishing workflow calls for checking the original reporting, attributing allegations, and distinguishing the date of an incident from the date of a warning or article. Names, amounts, dates, and outcomes need particular care. Later developments—such as a refund or a corrected account—can change the story.
Articles should use original summaries, with source links close to the claims they support. Substantive corrections should update the article’s updated date while preserving an existing original publication date. These are editorial standards, not a claim that mistakes cannot happen.
Names and labels need qualification
Discouraging personal details in reports is not the same as promising that a number page never shows a name. An optional third-party caller-ID source can supply a reported caller name. The public panel labels it unverified; it may be wrong, outdated, or connected to a previous number holder.
Carrier details and automated warning labels also provide context, not identity verification. A legitimate-looking name or favorable label is not permission to share sensitive information with an unexpected caller.
Ask us to review a problem
We respond to valid legal requests for content removal within 48 hours. This is a response commitment, not a promise that content will be removed or a case resolved within that time. Routine correction and review requests do not carry the same deadline.
For a report or reply, use Report
Choose the flag control beside the content and identify the concern. Flagging sends it for review; it does not automatically remove an already-published report.
For a number, request removal on its page
Look up the number and open Request removal of this number. The request is reviewed rather than automatically approved. Approved requests replace the public listing with a removal notice; that notice offers a separate dispute route.
For an article or another concern, contact us
Include the page URL, the specific passage or issue, and a source or explanation that helps us assess it. Use private contact for sensitive concerns and legal requests, not a public report. A submission does not guarantee a particular outcome.