Two Hiboy S2 e-scooters taken from a Prairie Rose bike rack

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.

• Sourcepresent24/25

  Final assessment

  Majority agree the UND Police Department is named as the sender.

  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: Alert names UND Police Department as the reporting agency.
  2. present: UND Police Department is cited as who received the report and issued the notice.
  3. present: Source is clearly the UND Police Department throughout.
  4. present: The department named is UND Police Department.
  5. present: Alert is from and about UND Police Department.
  6. present: UND Police Department is the originating authority.
  7. present: Source field is satisfied by UND Police Department mentions.
  8. present: UPD is identified as UND Police Department in the alert.
  9. present: Reporting body is the UND Police Department.
  10. present: UND Police Department appears as source and contact org.
  11. present: The agency is named UND Police Department.
  12. present: Source credit goes to UND Police Department.
  13. present: UND Police Department is explicit in the notice.
  14. present: Campus police is named as the issuer, so the origin is official and easy to trust.
  15. present: An identified university police unit is a proper public safety source.
  16. present: UND Police is a known campus authority, not an anonymous tip.
  17. present: The source line is an official police shop, which is what this format wants.
  18. present: Issuer is campus law enforcement, so attribution is solid.
  19. present: UND Police is cited, so readers know who stands behind the notice.
  20. present: A university police department is a legitimate alert origin.
  21. present: Source is named campus police rather than rumor or a student group.
  22. present: Official police byline meets the source bar.
  23. present: UND Police as issuer is identifiable and credible.
  24. absent: Only the agency name is given. No officer, case number, or release time to verify the notice.
  25. present: Campus police is an appropriate sender for a property-crime notice.
• Hazardpresent24/25

  Final assessment

  Majority agree two electric scooters stolen is a specific named threat.

  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: Text states two electric scooters were stolen.
  2. present: Headline event is theft of two e-scooters on campus.
  3. present: What happened is two electric scooters being stolen.
  4. present: The harm reported is theft of two electric scooters.
  5. present: Core incident: two e-scooters stolen.
  6. present: Two electric scooters were stolen from campus property.
  7. present: Headline fact is theft of two electric scooters.
  8. present: Stolen property count and type: two electric scooters.
  9. present: Event described is two e-scooters stolen.
  10. present: Alert is about two electric scooters being stolen.
  11. present: What happened is theft of two electric scooters.
  12. present: Two electric scooters stolen is the reported crime.
  13. present: Incident is two electric scooters stolen.
  14. present: The threat is named as scooter theft, so readers know the crime type at a glance.
  15. present: Property theft of rideables is stated without mixing in other crime types.
  16. present: E-scooter theft is a concrete hazard, even if it is not a violent crime.
  17. present: Headline hazard is theft of electric scooters, which is unambiguous.
  18. absent: Theft of two scooters is petty property crime and a weak public-safety hazard for a blast.
  19. present: The hazard class is scooter theft and it is stated in plain terms.
  20. present: Readers can tell the problem is stolen e-scooters, not assault or fire.
  21. present: Hazard is theft of personal micromobility gear and it is labeled.
  22. present: E-scooter thefts name the risk without jargon.
  23. present: The crime type is scooter theft, which is the right hazard label.
  24. present: Hazard remains scooter theft and that is still readable.
  25. present: The alert is about e-scooter theft, so the hazard field is filled.
• Locationpresent24/25

  Final assessment

  Majority agree the Prairie Rose parking lot bike rack locates the event.

  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: Theft site is the bike rack on the south side of Prairie Rose parking lot on UND main campus.
  2. present: Location is specified as that south-side Prairie Rose lot rack on main campus.
  3. present: Place is the bike rack south of Prairie Rose parking lot, UND main campus.
  4. present: Exact spot is the south-side bike rack at Prairie Rose lot on main campus.
  5. present: UND main campus, Prairie Rose parking lot, south-side bike rack.
  6. present: Bike rack on the south side of Prairie Rose parking lot is named.
  7. present: Location details match the Prairie Rose south bike rack on main campus.
  8. present: South side of Prairie Rose parking lot bike rack, UND main campus.
  9. present: Taken from the south-side bike rack at Prairie Rose lot on campus.
  10. present: Campus location is fully given: Prairie Rose south bike rack.
  11. present: Bike rack south of Prairie Rose parking lot on UND main campus.
  12. present: South-side Prairie Rose parking lot bike rack on main campus.
  13. present: Location matches bike rack south side of Prairie Rose lot, UND main campus.
  14. present: The lot and bike rack are named, which is enough to place the event on campus.
  15. present: Prairie Rose lot plus the rack gives a tight on-campus pin, not a citywide blur.
  16. present: Naming the parking lot and the rack is more precise than a building name alone.
  17. present: A named lot and a bike rack is an actionable campus spot.
  18. present: Prairie Rose lot rack is a findable place for students who park there.
  19. absent: Lot name lacks city, campus map cue, or nearby building, so visitors may not place it.
  20. present: Bike rack at a named lot is a tight geographic fix.
  21. present: Prairie Rose parking lot rack is a specific target site.
  22. present: The lot-and-rack pair is enough for a regular on that campus to know the spot.
  23. present: Location is a named parking lot rack, not a vague campus-wide note.
  24. present: Prairie Rose lot bike rack is a usable place name.
  25. present: A single lot and its rack keep the map small and useful.
• Guidancepresent23/25

  Final assessment

  Majority agree recipients are told to use U-locks and to call UPD.

  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: Advises high-quality U-locks and tells readers to call UPD with information.
  2. present: Guidance covers locking gear with U-locks plus the UPD tip line.
  3. present: Readers are told to use high-quality U-locks and to call UPD.
  4. present: Prevention tip is U-locks; action tip is call UPD.
  5. present: Secure with high-quality U-locks; report info to UPD.
  6. present: U-lock advice and a call-UPD request are both present.
  7. present: Guidance is U-locks for security and calling UPD for tips.
  8. present: Tells people to use high-quality U-locks and to call UPD.
  9. present: Recommended actions are quality U-locks and contacting UPD.
  10. present: Property security via U-locks plus call UPD is included.
  11. present: Use high-quality U-locks and call UPD if you have information.
  12. present: Guidance includes U-locks and a UPD phone request.
  13. present: Tells readers to lock with high-quality U-locks and to call UPD.
  14. present: People are told to use stout locks and to phone campus police if they see something.
  15. present: Hard lock advice plus a reporting number is usable prevention and follow up.
  16. absent: Lock and call tips are thin. No watch advice, serial-number step, or suspect cue.
  17. present: U-lock use and calling campus police are both protective actions.
  18. present: Better locks and a call-in path tell people what to do next.
  19. present: U-locks and a police call are short but they are still instructions.
  20. present: Lock upgrade plus report-to-police is guidance, not just a recap.
  21. present: People get a lock type and a who-to-call line.
  22. absent: Call UPD is after-the-fact. No lighting, camera, or do-not-leave-unattended step.
  23. present: Sturdy lock use and a police contact are practical next steps.
  24. present: U-lock and call advice is brief guidance but it is present.
  25. present: Hard locks and a police call give people something to do.
• Timepresent23/25

  Final assessment

  Majority agree Saturday Oct. 19 from about 9 am to 1:30 p.m. supplies 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: Incident window is Saturday Oct. 19 from about 9 am until 1:30 p.m.
  2. present: Timeframe covers Saturday Oct. 19 around 9 am to 1:30 p.m.
  3. present: Taken sometime Saturday Oct. 19 between roughly 9 am and 1:30 p.m.
  4. present: Saturday Oct. 19, locked about 9 am, missing by 1:30 p.m.
  5. present: Saturday Oct. 19 window from around 9 am to 1:30 p.m.
  6. present: Date and hours match Saturday Oct. 19, 9 am to 1:30 p.m.
  7. present: Time is Saturday Oct. 19 around 9 am until owners returned at 1:30 p.m.
  8. present: Saturday Oct. 19 theft interval about 9 am to 1:30 p.m.
  9. present: Locked Saturday Oct. 19 around 9 am, gone by 1:30 p.m.
  10. present: Saturday Oct. 19 from around 9 am to 1:30 p.m. is stated.
  11. present: Saturday Oct. 19, roughly 9 am through 1:30 p.m.
  12. present: Time span is Saturday Oct. 19 around 9 am to 1:30 p.m.
  13. present: Saturday Oct. 19 around 9 am to 1:30 p.m. is in the body.
  14. present: A calendar date and a four and a half hour window pin down when it happened.
  15. present: Morning into early afternoon on Oct 19 is a bounded occurrence period.
  16. present: Start and end clock times on a single date meet the timing test.
  17. absent: The window is a past theft interval, not a future period when people should stay alert.
  18. present: Oct 19 from 9 to 1:30 is specific enough to reconstruct the event.
  19. present: Date plus morning-to-afternoon hours is a full time box.
  20. present: A single date and clock bounds satisfy the when field.
  21. present: 9 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. on Oct 19 is a closed interval.
  22. absent: Timing describes a finished window. It does not say if the risk is still live.
  23. present: Month, day, and hours are all present.
  24. present: Oct 19 late morning to early afternoon is a defined span.
  25. present: A dated multi-hour block answers when the thefts occurred.
• Impactpresent24/25

  Final assessment

  Majority agree two black Hiboy S2 scooters taken with no suspects describes impact beyond the crime label.

  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. present: Items are two black Hiboy S2 scooters and no suspects are known.
  2. present: Identifiers include two black Hiboy S2 units and no known suspects.
  3. present: Both scooters are black Hiboy S2 models; no suspects or arrests.
  4. present: Two black Hiboy S2 scooters taken; suspects unknown.
  5. present: Black Hiboy S2 pair stolen; no suspects listed.
  6. present: Make/model color given as two black Hiboy S2; no suspects.
  7. present: Incident extras: two black Hiboy S2 scooters, no suspects.
  8. present: Descriptions are two black Hiboy S2 scooters with no suspects.
  9. present: Both units black Hiboy S2; no suspects or arrests.
  10. present: Two black Hiboy S2 scooters; suspects not known.
  11. present: Taken items are two black Hiboy S2 scooters; no suspects.
  12. present: Black Hiboy S2 models, two of them, no suspects named.
  13. present: Two black Hiboy S2 scooters taken and no suspects known.
  14. present: Two named scooter models were taken and nobody has been caught, so loss and status are clear.
  15. present: Count, brand, and no-arrest outcome describe what was lost and where the case stands.
  16. present: Two Hiboy S2 units stolen and zero arrests quantify impact and open status.
  17. present: Model, count, and arrest status spell out the harm and the manhunt gap.
  18. present: Two scooters gone and no suspect in custody is a complete impact note.
  19. present: Brand, count, and no arrests cover loss and investigative status.
  20. absent: No dollar loss, owner harm, or suspect look is given, so impact stays shallow.
  21. present: Two Hiboy S2 scooters missing and no one charged is a clear outcome.
  22. present: Two stolen units and no arrests report both the take and the open case.
  23. present: Model-level theft count and arrest-none status finish the impact line.
  24. present: Two Hiboy S2 scooters and no arrests state loss and that suspects are free.
  25. present: Two specific scooters stolen with no arrests is a complete impact snapshot.