Three electric scooters taken from Mills, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke racks

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. University Police Department letterhead and the line UNH Police are issuing a timely warning identify the sending authority.

  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 letterhead names University Police Department, and the body says UNH Police are issuing a timely warning.
  2. present: Both the masthead and the first sentence name UNH Police as the author of the notice.
  3. present: The issuing authority is UNH Police, stated up front and on the department letterhead.
  4. present: A branded University Police Department header plus UNH Police in the body identifies who sent the notice.
  5. present: Source is present because UNH Police Department is named as the issuer of a timely warning.
  6. present: Who is speaking is clear: University Police Department letterhead and UNH Police in the opening line.
  7. present: The UNH Police Department both issues the warning and lists its Waterworks Road contact block.
  8. present: University Police Department is printed at the top, identifying the sending agency.
  9. present: UNH Police are issuing a timely warning names the campus police as sender.
  10. present: The CALEA accredited University Police Department letterhead and UNH Police byline identify the authority.
  11. present: Sender is UNH Police, stated as the issuer and as the contact for tips.
  12. present: A full University Police Department masthead with Durham address identifies who sent it.
  13. present: UNH Police Department received the reports and is issuing the warning, so source is present.
  14. present: Who sent it is the University Police Department, named on the letterhead and in the first line.
  15. present: The agency is identified as UNH Police issuing a timely warning to the community.
  16. present: University Police Department at 18 Waterworks Road is the named issuing office.
  17. present: UNH Police and the University Police Department masthead both name the sender.
  18. present: The opening sentence attributes the warning to UNH Police.
  19. present: Letterhead, phone block, and UNH Police as issuer together identify the source.
  20. present: Source is met by University Police Department branding and UNH Police in the body.
  21. present: UNH Police Department is the named agency receiving reports and issuing the warning.
  22. present: Who is sending it is UNH Police, printed on letterhead and in the first paragraph.
  23. present: The University Police Department header and UNH Police byline identify the issuer.
  24. present: UNH Police are issuing a timely warning is an explicit sender attribution.
  25. present: A full UPD letterhead with www.unh.edu/upd plus UNH Police in the text identifies the source.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous agreement that motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters, also called stolen electric scooters, 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: The threat is specified as motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters, not a generic incident.
  2. present: Stolen electric scooters and motor vehicle thefts name a specific crime.
  3. present: The hazard is three motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters.
  4. present: Electric scooter thefts are a concrete threat rather than an unnamed emergency.
  5. present: What happened is specified: theft of three electric scooters treated as motor vehicles.
  6. present: The message names motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters as the hazard.
  7. present: A specific crime, theft of electric scooters, is named rather than a vague situation.
  8. present: The timely warning is for stolen electric scooters, a specific property crime.
  9. present: Motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters is a specific named threat.
  10. present: Hazard is the report of three electric scooter thefts.
  11. present: What the threat is appears as stolen electric scooters, a specific crime.
  12. present: The opening names 3 motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters.
  13. present: The crime type is theft of electric scooters, which is specific.
  14. present: The threat is motor vehicle theft involving electric scooters.
  15. present: Electric scooter thefts are named outright as the hazard.
  16. present: The message specifies thefts of a Hiboy and two NIUKQi scooters, a concrete crime.
  17. present: A timely warning for motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters names the hazard.
  18. present: Stolen electric scooters is a specific threat, not a generic emergency.
  19. present: Three motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters is a named crime type.
  20. present: The hazard is theft of electric scooters, including named makes and colors.
  21. present: Motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters specifies what the threat is.
  22. present: The threat is identified as stolen electric scooters, a specific property crime.
  23. present: Electric scooter thefts are a specific named hazard.
  24. present: The message names 3 motor vehicle thefts of electric scooters.
  25. present: The text reports stolen electric scooters rather than a vague emergency or situation.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All 25 reads find location in the bike racks at Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall, three named campus places.

  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 scooters were taken from bike racks at Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall.
  2. present: Three named campus buildings, Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall, locate the thefts.
  3. present: Location is given as the bike racks at Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith and Stoke Hall.
  4. present: Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall are specific campus places.
  5. present: The bike racks at three named halls place the events on campus.
  6. present: Named buildings Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall satisfy location.
  7. present: Thefts are tied to bike racks at three identified residence or academic halls.
  8. present: Where is answered: bike racks at Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall.
  9. present: Three hall names plus bike racks give a campus location.
  10. present: The letter names three campus buildings as the bike-rack sites.
  11. present: Location includes named campus halls and their bike racks.
  12. present: They were taken from bike racks at three specified halls.
  13. present: Hamilton Smith, Stoke Hall, and Mills Hall locate the bike-rack thefts.
  14. present: Campus buildings are named as the places the scooters were taken from.
  15. present: Bike racks at Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall are specific sites.
  16. present: Place is given with three hall names and bike racks.
  17. present: UNH locates the thefts at Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall bike racks.
  18. present: Named halls supply where the scooters were taken.
  19. present: Each theft is placed at a named hall bike rack on the UNH campus.
  20. present: Bike racks at three named UNH halls locate the incidents.
  21. present: The taking sites are the bike racks at Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall.
  22. present: Three campus buildings are named as the theft sites.
  23. present: Where is stated as Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall bike racks.
  24. present: Named halls and bike racks answer where.
  25. present: Mills Hall, Hamilton Smith, and Stoke Hall are specific campus places, not just campus.
• Guidancepresent20/25

  Final assessment

  Most reads treat register your scooter and always secure your scooter as protective instructions. A minority treats those closings as stock prevention and the police number as a tip request, not live 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. present: Recipients are told to register scooters with UNH Transportation and always secure their scooters.
  2. present: Always secure your scooter is an instruction to lock property, a protective action.
  3. present: The close tells people to register with UNH Transportation and to secure scooters.
  4. absent: Contacting police with tips and a reminder to secure scooters are after-the-fact prevention and a tip request, not live protective guidance.
  5. present: Register your scooter and always secure your scooter are directed instructions to recipients.
  6. present: Protective action appears in the instruction to always secure scooters and to register them.
  7. present: Recipients are instructed to register scooters and keep them secured.
  8. present: Always secure your scooter tells people what action to take with their property.
  9. absent: Asking for information on these crimes is a tip line, and the secure reminder is a slogan, not an emergency protective order.
  10. present: The text instructs readers who have not registered to do so and to secure scooters.
  11. present: Secure your scooter is lock-your-property guidance aimed at the community.
  12. present: Register with UNH Transportation is an instruction to recipients, as is securing scooters.
  13. present: Readers are told to contact police with information, register scooters, and keep them secured.
  14. absent: No avoid, shelter, or lockdown instruction appears, and tips, registration, and a remember-to-secure line are not live protective actions.
  15. present: Always secure your scooter is a direct protective instruction to lock property.
  16. present: Recipients are told to register scooters and to secure them going forward.
  17. present: Please contact UNH Police, register your scooter, and secure it are actions directed at readers.
  18. present: The closing lines instruct people to register with Transportation and always secure scooters.
  19. absent: The only asks are for tips and optional registration, while remember to always secure is stock prevention, not guidance for this event.
  20. present: Secure your scooter is lock-doors style property protection aimed at recipients.
  21. present: Instructions include registering scooters with UNH Transportation and keeping them secured.
  22. present: Recipients are told to secure scooters, a protective property action.
  23. absent: Call if you have information is a witness request, and registration plus a general secure reminder are not protective actions for an unfolding emergency.
  24. present: Always secure your scooter and register it with UNH Transportation tell readers what to do.
  25. present: The body directs people to contact police, register scooters, and always secure them.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Broad agreement that the September 12, 2024 dateline, report dates 9/10/24 and 9/11/24, and the 9/7/24 to 9/11/24 taking window 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 letter is dated September 12, 2024, with thefts between 9/7/24 and 9/11/24.
  2. present: Report dates 9/10/24 and 9/11/24 plus a dated theft window supply timing.
  3. present: Time is present via September 12, 2024 and the 9/7/24 to 9/11/24 interval.
  4. present: Multiple calendar dates, including the September 12, 2024 dateline, mark when reports arrived and when scooters were taken.
  5. present: The department received reports on 9/10/24 and 9/11/24, giving recency.
  6. present: Dates of taking, 9/7/24 through 9/11/24, convey when the hazard occurred.
  7. present: The dateline September 12, 2024 and several September report dates supply time.
  8. present: Clockless but dated: September 12, 2024 plus 9/10/24 and 9/11/24 report days.
  9. present: Recency is given with report dates 9/10/24 and 9/11/24.
  10. present: A dated letterhead day and a multi-day taking window both mark time.
  11. present: September 12, 2024 is printed above the body, a clear date.
  12. present: The taking window 9/7/24 to 9/11/24 is an explicit when.
  13. present: Two reports on 9/10/24 and a third on 9/11/24 give dated recency.
  14. present: Dates throughout the letter, including September 12, 2024, satisfy time.
  15. present: Time cues include the dateline and the 9/7/24 through 9/11/24 theft span.
  16. present: Report days 9/10/24 and 9/11/24 plus the September 12 letter date mark when.
  17. present: Several September 2024 dates appear, so recency is present.
  18. present: The scooters were taken between 9/7/24 and 9/11/24, an explicit interval.
  19. present: September 12, 2024 dates the notice itself.
  20. present: Dated reports on 9/10/24 and 9/11/24 convey when police learned of the thefts.
  21. present: The taking period 9/7/24 to 9/11/24 and the September 12 dateline are time references.
  22. present: Time is present through September 12, 2024 and the mid-September report dates.
  23. present: Multiple dates from 9/7/24 through September 12, 2024 satisfy the time element.
  24. present: A third report on 9/11/24 plus the letter date give recency.
  25. present: Dates of reports and of taking, including 9/10/24, 9/11/24, and September 12, 2024, mark when.
• Impactabsent3/25

  Final assessment

  Most reads find no impact because stolen restates the theft and no severity wording appears. A few treat taking locked scooters as a stated property-loss consequence.

  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: Naming stolen scooters restates the theft and does not describe severity or further harm.
  2. absent: No language such as dangerous, injurious, or life threatening appears.
  3. absent: Impact is absent because the text never states what the thefts could do to people or property beyond naming them.
  4. absent: Stolen restates the crime and adds no consequence or seriousness cue.
  5. absent: There is no statement of potential injury, danger, or other harm beyond the theft itself.
  6. absent: The alert does not say the thefts are serious, damaging, or a safety risk.
  7. present: Taking locked scooters states a completed property loss, which is a consequence of the thefts.
  8. absent: Locked versus unlocked describes how scooters were stored, not how severe the hazard is.
  9. absent: No severity wording appears, so impact is not met.
  10. absent: Potential harm to people is never mentioned, and property loss is only implied by the crime name.
  11. absent: The message never calls the thefts dangerous or otherwise severe.
  12. absent: Naming models and colors describes stolen items, not impact or severity.
  13. absent: There is no consequence language such as risk of injury or further loss.
  14. absent: Impact fails because seriousness or what the hazard could do is never stated.
  15. absent: Stolen and taken restate the theft without adding a harm or severity claim.
  16. present: Two locked scooters being taken conveys that property can be lost even when secured, a stated consequence.
  17. absent: No deadly, dangerous, or injury language is used, so impact is absent.
  18. absent: The locked-or-not detail is a circumstance of the thefts, not a statement of impact.
  19. absent: Nothing describes injury, danger, or how serious the thefts are.
  20. absent: Impact is not present: the text lists stolen models without stating consequences.
  21. absent: There is no explicit or strongly implied statement of harm beyond the crime name.
  22. present: Thefts of locked scooters imply ongoing risk of property loss, which is a consequence.
  23. absent: The alert never says the situation is dangerous or could cause injury.
  24. absent: Severity is not conveyed, because stolen and taken only repeat the hazard.
  25. absent: No consequence or seriousness language appears, so impact is coded absent.