Stalking outside Sutton Place by a known non-affiliate

To check this alert, SuperGrok Heavy 4.5 (an AI) read it in full 25 separate times, independently. Each read decided whether the message answers each of the six questions and gave a short reason. A final reviewer then weighed all 25 and wrote the plain-English verdict you see when you open a row. The score (for example 22/25) is how many reads agreed; the 25 individual reads are tucked underneath if you want to check them.

• Sourcepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads agree source is present. The Rollins College Campus Safety Department is named as the handling office, with phone and email as a sender tag.

  Who is sending the alert and who is responding. People act faster on a message from a clearly identifiable, credible sender, such as a named department, the police, or a branded alert system, than on an anonymous notice. A branded signature counts.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The Rollins College Campus Safety Department is named as the unit that received the report.
  2. present: Campus Safety appears as both the investigating office and the listed contact, identifying the sender.
  3. present: The first sentence credits the Rollins College Campus Safety Department, a named campus authority.
  4. present: Who issued the notice is clear from repeated Campus Safety naming and the closing contact block.
  5. present: Rollins College is identified in the department title that received and is handling the report.
  6. present: The text names Campus Safety as the office to email at campussafety@rollins.edu, a sender signature.
  7. present: A campus agency, the Campus Safety Department, is the actor throughout the narrative.
  8. present: Source is present: Campus Safety received the report, is handling it, and invites further contact.
  9. present: Naming the Rollins College Campus Safety Department satisfies the who is sending test.
  10. present: The notice is voiced as Campus Safety describing its own intake and the contact options.
  11. present: Campus Safety at 407-646-2999 is given as the official contact, marking the issuing unit.
  12. present: Rollins College Campus Safety Department is a named agency, and the college names itself.
  13. present: The body attributes the intake and follow up to Campus Safety, which is the issuing authority.
  14. present: An identified campus department, Campus Safety, is the speaker of the timely warning.
  15. present: The phrase the Rollins College Campus Safety Department received a report names the source.
  16. present: Campus Safety is specified, so the responding authority is not anonymous.
  17. present: Sender identity comes from Campus Safety in the narrative and in the closing contact block.
  18. present: Timely Warning language is paired with a named Campus Safety Department as the handling office.
  19. present: The email campussafety@rollins.edu is a branded departmental address that identifies the sender.
  20. present: Campus Safety invites contact by phone and email, naming the authority.
  21. present: The college names its Campus Safety Department as the office that took the stalking report.
  22. present: Source is the Rollins College Campus Safety Department, stated up front in the report sentence.
  23. present: A named campus safety unit plus a departmental phone line identify who is responding.
  24. present: The closing block repeats Campus Safety as the office to call or email, a source tag.
  25. present: Rollins College Campus Safety Department received a report is an identified sending authority.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous agreement that stalking and repeated unwanted contact name a specific hazard rather than a generic incident.

  What the threat actually is. A complete warning names the specific danger, such as a shooter, a fire, a tornado, or a gas leak, rather than a vague emergency, because people decide what to do based on what they are facing.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: Stalking is the header crime, and the body adds repeated, unwanted contact toward a student.
  2. present: A specific Clery crime, stalking, is stated rather than a generic incident or situation.
  3. present: Repeated, unwanted contact and behavior specifies the stalking hazard.
  4. present: The message titles the event Stalking, which is a specific threat type.
  5. present: Hazard is present because stalking and unwanted contact are both named.
  6. present: The text describes a known non-Rollins affiliate engaged in repeated unwanted behavior.
  7. present: Stalking is stated in the headline and again in the received a report sentence.
  8. present: The wording names stalking as the crime rather than a vague incident label.
  9. present: The hazard line is stalking of a student with a prior dating relationship.
  10. present: Non generic wording appears: stalking, not emergency or situation alone.
  11. present: A known non-affiliate engaged in repeated unwanted contact is a specific named threat.
  12. present: The notice classifies the event as stalking, meeting the specific threat test.
  13. present: Prior dating relationship plus repeated unwanted behavior together name an interpersonal stalking hazard.
  14. present: What the threat is is answered as stalking on campus grounds.
  15. present: The opening crime label Stalking is specific enough for hazard.
  16. present: Campus Safety received a report of stalking, which names the hazard plainly.
  17. present: Repeated unwanted contact toward a student with a prior dating relationship is not a catch all incident phrase.
  18. present: The crime is identified as stalking rather than an unspecified situation.
  19. present: Header and body both specify stalking as the reported offense.
  20. present: A specific interpersonal crime, stalking, is the subject of the timely warning.
  21. present: The report concerns repeated unwanted behavior, a concrete hostile pattern, not a vague emergency.
  22. present: Hazard is stalking, stated as the reason for the timely warning.
  23. present: Naming stalking and the unwanted conduct satisfies the specific threat requirement.
  24. present: Unwanted contact and behavior toward a Rollins student names the stalking pattern.
  25. present: A known non-Rollins affiliate stalking a student is a defined interpersonal threat.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads find location on campus grounds outside Sutton Place Apartments.

  Where the threat is. Saying whether danger is in a specific building, a part of campus, or area-wide lets people judge their own proximity and choose a safe direction. Without a where, a warning is hard to act on precisely.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The reported stalking occurred on campus grounds outside of Sutton Place Apartments.
  2. present: Location is Sutton Place Apartments, given in the first narrative sentence.
  3. present: Sutton Place Apartments is a specific place on campus where the report is sited.
  4. present: The text places the incident outside Sutton Place Apartments rather than an unnamed area.
  5. present: A named apartment complex, Sutton Place Apartments, is the location of the reported stalking.
  6. present: Occurrence is tied to campus grounds outside Sutton Place, which is a concrete site.
  7. present: The phrase that occurred on campus grounds outside of Sutton Place Apartments is an explicit place marker.
  8. present: Recipients are told the crime happened outside Sutton Place Apartments.
  9. present: The apartments named Sutton Place locate the stalking report.
  10. present: Location is present, and Sutton Place Apartments is specified as the scene.
  11. present: The notice names Sutton Place Apartments and campus grounds and does not omit place.
  12. present: Sutton Place Apartments functions as the on campus address for the incident.
  13. present: A residence-style complex name, Sutton Place Apartments, is stated.
  14. present: The report is geographically anchored outside Sutton Place Apartments.
  15. present: Place is Sutton Place Apartments, not merely campus in general, though that would also count.
  16. present: The sentence received a report regarding an incident of stalking that occurred on campus grounds supplies location.
  17. present: Readers can tell where: outside Sutton Place Apartments.
  18. present: A specific apartment name appears, Sutton Place Apartments.
  19. present: The incident is located on campus grounds outside Sutton Place Apartments.
  20. present: Sutton Place Apartments is the named site of the unwanted contact.
  21. present: Location coding is met by the building complex Sutton Place Apartments.
  22. present: The text says the stalking occurred on campus grounds outside Sutton Place Apartments.
  23. present: Named place: Sutton Place Apartments.
  24. present: Campus grounds outside Sutton Place Apartments answers where.
  25. present: Outside of Sutton Place Apartments is an explicit campus location phrase.
• Guidanceabsent3/25

  Final assessment

  Most reads find no protective instruction: contacting Campus Safety for additional information is a tips request. A minority treats that phone line as guidance.

  The protective action to take. A clear, specific instruction, such as shelter in place, evacuate, avoid the area, or run-hide-fight, drives faster and more correct protective behavior than describing the threat alone.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: No instruction tells people to avoid Sutton Place, lock doors, or take other protective action.
  2. absent: Contact Campus Safety if you have additional information is a request for tips, not guidance.
  3. absent: Care and resources are for the reporting party, which describes responder aid rather than public action.
  4. present: The close tells readers to contact Campus Safety at 407-646-2999, an action similar to calling police.
  5. absent: There is no shelter, evacuate, stay away, or remain indoors language.
  6. absent: The body reports identification and victim support but never instructs the audience to protect themselves.
  7. absent: Please contact is optional tip reporting, not a protective action order.
  8. absent: Recipients are not told to avoid the apartments, monitor updates, or lock down.
  9. absent: Identifying both individuals and offering the reporting party care is status, not audience instruction.
  10. absent: Connected with the proper offices is about the victim, not a community protective step.
  11. absent: The rubric excludes describing responder work, and that is all the care and identification sentences do.
  12. present: Emailing campussafety@rollins.edu is presented as what people should do if they know more, a directed action.
  13. absent: The notice informs rather than directs and never says stay inside or leave.
  14. absent: Additional information should be phoned in, which is a witness request rather than protective guidance.
  15. absent: Being provided with care is not an instruction to the people reading the warning.
  16. absent: Readers get a phone number for tips, not an order to shelter, evacuate, or avoid.
  17. absent: Nothing in the text tells students what protective action to take now.
  18. absent: Both individuals have been identified is status, which the rubric says is not guidance.
  19. absent: The message contains no avoid, evacuate, lock, or stay away directive.
  20. absent: Providing care does not equal telling the campus what protective step to take.
  21. present: Call Campus Safety at the listed number is an instruction to recipients, comparable to call 911.
  22. absent: Protective action for the public is missing, and only a tips contact is offered.
  23. absent: Guidance fails because the only ask is to share additional information, not to take cover or leave.
  24. absent: The reporting party is connected with offices, which is victim services rather than public guidance.
  25. absent: If you have any additional information is a tips line, not shelter in place or avoid the area.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Broad agreement that March 5, 2025, March 4, 2025, and at this time satisfy time.

  When the message applies. A timestamp, the word now or immediately, or a phrase like until further notice tells the reader whether the danger is current and how quickly to act.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. present: The header date March 5, 2025 and the incident date March 4, 2025 both mark when.
  2. present: On March 4, 2025 is a date for the report.
  3. present: March 5, 2025 stamps the timely warning itself.
  4. present: Recency is present through the dated report on March 4, 2025.
  5. present: At this time is a recency cue attached to the threat assessment.
  6. present: The notice tells when the department received the report: March 4, 2025.
  7. present: Time is present: March 4, 2025, plus the March 5 product date.
  8. present: A product date of March 5, 2025 is printed under Stalking.
  9. present: At this time plus the March 4 date convey when the assessment applies.
  10. present: Both the issuance date and the incident date are written out.
  11. present: Ongoing in no ongoing threat is a recency word listed in the time rubric.
  12. present: Calendar time is given as March 4, 2025 and March 5, 2025.
  13. present: When is answered by March 4, 2025.
  14. present: The opening block includes the date March 5, 2025.
  15. present: Dated language appears in the first narrative sentence: March 4, 2025.
  16. present: Time coding is met by two March 2025 dates and at this time.
  17. present: Recipients can tell the event is tied to March 4, 2025.
  18. present: March 5, 2025 is a clear date, independent of the later March 4 mention.
  19. present: At this time, there is no indication uses a present-tense recency frame.
  20. present: The warning is dated, and the underlying report is also dated.
  21. present: A specific day, March 4, 2025, is stated for the stalking report.
  22. present: Time is not missing: dates and at this time are in the text.
  23. present: The March dates and at this time wording meet the when or recency test.
  24. present: On March 4, 2025, the department received a report supplies when.
  25. present: March 5, 2025, March 4, 2025, at this time, and ongoing together satisfy time.
• Impactabsent6/25

  Final assessment

  Most reads find no impact because stalking names the crime without severity wording. A few treat unwanted contact or the no ongoing threat sentence as implied harm.

  What the hazard could do to the people in its path. Beyond naming the threat, a complete warning conveys its potential consequences or severity, such as that a tornado can level buildings or that a leak could be explosive, so recipients grasp how much danger they are in. Research on warning message content finds that a concrete impact statement helps people personalize their risk and act sooner.

  See all 25 individual reads

  1. absent: Stalking names the crime without added severity words such as dangerous or life threatening.
  2. absent: No sentence states injury, death, or other consequences the hazard could cause.
  3. present: Repeated unwanted contact implies intended harm to the student, a stated interpersonal consequence.
  4. absent: Impact is absent because naming stalking does not by itself describe what it could do.
  5. absent: The text reports a crime and a response, not the severity of harm to people or property.
  6. absent: Unwanted contact restates the offense rather than spelling out injury risk for the community.
  7. absent: Care and resources describe support, not the damage the stalking might inflict.
  8. present: The phrase ongoing threat to the general campus safety discusses danger even while saying it is not present.
  9. absent: No indication of an ongoing threat actually denies community-level consequences.
  10. present: Unwanted behavior toward a former dating partner implies a risk of further harm to that person.
  11. absent: Impact fails: the message never says what the stalking could do.
  12. absent: Identifying the parties and offering care does not convey consequence or seriousness.
  13. absent: Nothing warns that the conduct is life threatening or could injure others.
  14. absent: No explicit statement of how serious the harm is appears beyond the crime name.
  15. absent: The Clery label stalking is the hazard name, which the rubric says is not enough for impact.
  16. present: Repeated unwanted contact is stated interpersonal harm toward a student.
  17. absent: The notice is silent on outcomes such as injury or remaining danger, and even denies a general threat.
  18. absent: Consequences are not stated, only the crime type and the investigation plus care.
  19. present: Threat to the general campus safety is severity language even in a negative sentence.
  20. absent: Providing care does not equal stating the hazard's potential effects.
  21. absent: No property damage, injury, or danger clause accompanies the report.
  22. absent: Naming a prior dating relationship and unwanted contact still does not add explicit severity language.
  23. absent: Impact is not present: there is no stated consequence beyond the crime's name.
  24. present: No ongoing threat still uses threat language, which some readers treat as an impact cue.
  25. absent: Denying an ongoing threat to general campus safety withholds community consequence rather than stating it.