UXR for Journalists

UXR offers journalists a developing framework for examining how institutions consume or preserve human time, attention, effort, dignity, agency, safety, health, and opportunity.

A project engineering its methods in public

UXR began by documenting a framework, moved into engineering and testing that framework in public, and is now accepting limited real-world submissions in Private Alpha. Outside sandboxed regression tests, its casework uses real experiences and records rather than invented case stories.

The project has reached this stage without a formal programming team, board of directors, or dedicated domain. That makes the development path unusual, but not self-validating. The more consequential fact is inspectability: UXR now has a bounded intake process, evidence and correction records, proposition provenance, release gates, a private regression ledger, and public changelog entries that record failures as well as additions.

What the first intake test found

The first 12-fixture manual baseline produced eight passes and four failures, so the suite failed overall. It was manual, single-grader, self-graded, and sequential. No executable publication broker was in the decision path. UXR therefore does not claim that broker enforcement has been validated or that the failed suite passed.

The observed defect led to fail-closed candidate/source-resolution records, a no-manufactured-attribution invariant, authoritative result linkage, idempotent write identities, a frozen v1 specification, and draft successor coverage. Fixture scenarios, acceptance criteria, prohibited constructions, and document-to-test mappings remain private so the benchmark cannot be reverse-engineered.

What journalists can examine

• whether public cases stay bounded to the evidence actually supplied;

• whether source attribution preserves testimony without turning it into independently established fact;

• whether organizations are distinguished from departments, products, mechanisms, and service pathways;

• whether private intake remains separate from public publication;

• whether UXR corrects its own records visibly;

• whether positive performance and verified reform receive the same evidentiary discipline as failures;

• whether readiness language matches what has actually been tested.

Potential story areas

• small public-interest infrastructure built before a formal organization exists;

• engineering and testing an AI-assisted intake process in public;

• organizations reporting efficiency while transferring work onto customers, patients, workers, or the public;

• formal rights that cannot be exercised in practice;

• systems that make correction harder than the original transaction;

• organizations that measurably improve and return time or agency to people.

Current limits

UXR does not yet have a mature or representative case database, validated automated broker, staffed public intake service, operational Blue Score, or broad scientific validation. Private Alpha submissions are limited, and publication remains a separate human-gated process.

How journalists can contribute

Journalists can inspect whether UXR overstates evidence, identify missing domains, contribute public records or reporting methods, challenge governance and privacy assumptions, and point to reforms or institutional responses that deserve documentation. Participation in review does not automatically enroll anyone's experience into a public case.

Live UXR Cases · Complete UXR Reviewer Packet · Current Project Status · Contributing to UXR · Development Changelog