Three layers of
moderation governance
Every platform shares the same legal floor, and builds up from there. Knowing which layer a question belongs to tells you who sets the rules, and what you need to be able to show.
What the rules mean
Regulations are written in legal language. Your moderation team works in queues, sanctions and appeals. Here is how the two line up, and where Amanda supports each duty.
| The duty | What it means day to day | How Amanda supports it |
|---|---|---|
| Notice and action DSA, UK OSA | Your user reports queue. Reports need a clear way in, and a prompt, careful decision. | User reports flow into Amanda, where they are prioritised and routed to automated or human review. |
| Statement of reasons DSA | Telling users why their content was removed or their account restricted, and whether the decision was automated. | Every action is logged with the rule it enforces and how the decision was made. |
| Appeals DSA, UK OSA | Users can challenge a decision. Under the DSA, appeals cannot be decided by automation alone. | Appeals go to human moderators, with the full case history in front of them. |
| Protection of minors DSA, UK OSA, COPPA | Stronger protection wherever children can use your service, from chat to profiles. | Detection for grooming and other child safety risks, with escalation to your team. |
| Risk assessment DSA, UK OSA | Knowing which harms can happen on your service, and showing how you reduce them. | Moderation data and trends give your risk assessment real evidence to stand on. |
| Transparency reporting DSA, UK OSA | Publishing your moderation numbers in the format regulators expect. | Reports are drafted from your moderation data and exported in machine readable formats. |
The rules our
customers ask about most
Where your company is based matters less than where your users are. These are the three regulations that regularly come up.
Operating in other markets, such as Australia?
Ask us which rules apply and how Amanda fits.
Decisions you can explain,
reports you can stand behind
Humans in the loop
AI handles volume. Trained moderators handle the hard calls, the edge cases and the appeals.
Every decision is traceable
What happened, which rule applied, and who or what decided. Everything is ready when a user or a regulator asks.
Reports generated from your usage data
Transparency reports are drafted from your moderation data, so your team reviews and adds context instead of starting from scratch.
Works with what you have
If you don’t use Amanda for moderation you can still use our Transparency Report Wizard via API or manual input.
FAQ
Q: Does using Amanda make us compliant?
No tool can do that on its own. Compliance depends on your policies, your processes and your decisions. Amanda gives you the moderation workflow, human review, documentation and reporting those obligations rely on, so you can show what you do and why.
Q: Why does human review matter for compliance?
Regulators expect platforms to make careful, proportionate decisions and to correct mistakes. The DSA, for example, requires that appeals are not decided by automated means alone. Human review is how you meet that expectation.
Q: We are not based in the EU or UK. Do these rules still apply?
Often, yes. The DSA and the UK Online Safety Act both look at where your users are, not where your company is registered. If you have users in those markets, it is worth checking.
Q: Where is Aiba based?
Aiba is a Norwegian company, so European privacy and safety rules are part of how we work every day.
Q: Do you give legal advice?
No. We know moderation and the operational side of these rules well, and we are happy to talk them through. For legal interpretation, your own counsel should have the final word.
