Timely warning for multi-day package burglaries near campus residences

To check this alert, Claude (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 via Clery Crime Alert branding, Columbia University Public Safety, and Columbia University naming.

  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: Columbia University Public Safety is named as the informed campus safety authority.
  2. present: Clery Crime Alert branding plus Public Safety identifies the institutional sender.
  3. present: Source is present: Public Safety and Columbia University appear in the body.
  4. present: The header Clery Crime Alert functions as a campus timely-warning source tag.
  5. present: Public Safety phone contact and Columbia University Public Safety name the issuer.
  6. present: Columbia University is identified as the required Clery Act alerter in the disclaimer.
  7. present: Who is sending includes Public Safety and Clery Crime Alert framing.
  8. present: Source satisfied by Columbia University Public Safety attribution in the lead.
  9. present: The alert credits Public Safety and references Columbia University compliance.
  10. present: Named campus safety office Public Safety counts as source.
  11. present: Clery Crime Alert title marks an official university timely warning channel.
  12. present: Institutional source appears as Columbia University Public Safety.
  13. present: Sender identification is Public Safety under a Clery Crime Alert header.
  14. present: Clear source from Public Safety naming and Columbia University Clery duty.
  15. present: Branded Clery Crime Alert plus Public Safety establishes the originator.
  16. present: Public Safety is a named campus agency under the source rubric.
  17. present: The message identifies Columbia University Public Safety as recently informed.
  18. present: Source cue is Clery Crime Alert with Public Safety in the opening narrative.
  19. present: Issuing body language includes Public Safety and Columbia University.
  20. present: University and campus public safety are both stated as related authorities.
  21. present: Columbia University Public Safety is explicit early in the narrative.
  22. present: Clery Crime Alert and Public Safety together identify the campus channel.
  23. present: Source present via dual naming of Public Safety and Columbia University.
  24. present: The text frames an official Columbia Clery timely warning from Public Safety.
  25. present: Both Clery Crime Alert branding and Public Safety establish source.
• Hazardpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: burglaries and package thefts are specifically named crime hazards, not bare emergency labels.

  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: Hazard is burglaries and package thefts, both specifically named crimes.
  2. present: Burglaries/Package Thefts in the header names the threat types.
  3. present: The threat is multi-day residential package removal labeled burglaries and package thefts.
  4. present: Named hazards: multiple burglaries with packages removed from buildings.
  5. present: Hazard present because burglaries and package thefts are explicit, not bare incident.
  6. present: What happened is multiple burglaries with the same individual removing packages.
  7. present: Package thefts and burglaries are the specific crime hazards.
  8. present: The alert reports burglaries and package thefts rather than a generic emergency.
  9. present: Specific crime language: burglaries and package thefts at residential addresses.
  10. present: An individual who removed several packages is described under those named crime types.
  11. present: Hazard wording includes burglaries and package thefts throughout.
  12. present: The incident type is serial burglaries with package thefts from lobbies.
  13. present: Named crimes burglaries and package thefts specify the hazard.
  14. present: Crime hazard is clear: burglaries and package thefts.
  15. present: Hazard is not generic; burglaries and package thefts are called out.
  16. present: Burglaries and package thefts are the dual named hazards.
  17. present: The body states multiple burglaries and package removals as the events.
  18. present: Hazard present: burglaries and package thefts with video of package removal.
  19. present: Readers learn the threats are burglaries and package thefts.
  20. present: Specific hazard names burglaries and package thefts appear in the title.
  21. present: Piggybacking entry and package taking are framed as burglaries and package thefts.
  22. present: The crime hazards are burglaries and package thefts, not vague situation labels.
  23. present: Named threat burglaries and package thefts satisfies the hazard element.
  24. present: What the community is warned about is burglaries and package thefts.
  25. present: Burglaries and package thefts are concrete hazard labels under Clery.
• Locationpresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous agreement that 523 West 112th Street and 150 Claremont Ave locate the multi-day package burglaries.

  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: Location is 523 West 112th Street and 150 Claremont Ave.
  2. present: 523 West 112th Street places the first and third incidents at a specific address.
  3. present: Where: 523 West 112th Street and 150 Claremont Ave.
  4. present: Three timed incidents span two named residential addresses near campus.
  5. present: Address-level locations on West 112th and Claremont Ave are present.
  6. present: Location present via 523 West 112th Street and 150 Claremont Ave.
  7. present: The crime sites are concrete residential street addresses.
  8. present: West 112th Street and Claremont Ave name the package theft locations.
  9. present: Geographic detail includes West 112th Street and Claremont Ave addresses.
  10. present: Campus-adjacent street addresses localize the Clery timely warning.
  11. present: 523 West 112th Street and 150 Claremont Ave name the crime scenes.
  12. present: Place is two named buildings on West 112th Street and Claremont Ave.
  13. present: Readers are told the exact street addresses of the package removals.
  14. present: Location element met by dual street addresses across two days.
  15. present: Nearby secure-delivery store addresses add area context without replacing the crime sites.
  16. present: The warning scope is named West 112th Street and Claremont Ave buildings.
  17. present: Street addresses on two nearby corridors give multi-point location.
  18. present: Where the packages were taken is stated as two residential addresses.
  19. present: Concrete location: West 112th Street and Claremont Ave buildings.
  20. present: Named addresses satisfy the location element.
  21. present: 523 West 112th Street is a specific building address on the block.
  22. present: Location includes two theft addresses with repeat incidents at West 112th.
  23. present: The text situates the crimes at named West 112th and Claremont addresses.
  24. present: Two residential addresses locate the serial package burglaries.
  25. present: West 112th Street and Claremont Ave addresses are unambiguous place references.
• Guidancepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  All reads find guidance in Harm Reduction Strategies: lock doors, do not buzz strangers, retrieve packages promptly, and use lockers or shipping-center delivery.

  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: Harm Reduction Strategies instruct making sure the door locks on every entry or exit.
  2. present: Guidance includes not buzzing people into a building unless you know who they are.
  3. present: Retrieve packages in a timely manner is a protective property-security action.
  4. present: Protective tips: lock doors, refuse unknown buzz-ins, use lockers and shipping centers.
  5. present: Guidance present via Harm Reduction Strategies with concrete safety steps.
  6. present: Recipients are told not to buzz people in unless they know who they are.
  7. present: Make sure the door locks behind you is an explicit building-security instruction.
  8. present: The alert directs people to retrieve packages promptly and use carrier pickup services.
  9. present: Safety guidance lists access control, door locking, and secure package handling.
  10. present: Harm Reduction Strategies function as recipient-facing protective actions.
  11. present: Guidance is present: lock doors, refuse unknown buzz-ins, secure package pickup.
  12. present: Protective instructions appear after the narrative under Harm Reduction Strategies.
  13. present: Readers are told what to do: control entry, lock doors, and fetch packages promptly.
  14. present: Guidance element met by door-lock, do-not-buzz, and secure-delivery instructions.
  15. present: FedEx Delivery Manager, UPS My Choice, and Amazon lockers are protective package options.
  16. present: The body tells people to lock the door behind them every time.
  17. present: Access protocol: do not buzz people in unless you know who they are and why.
  18. present: Actionable tips include timely package retrieval and nearby secure shipping stores.
  19. present: Guidance is not only tip solicitation; harm reduction steps instruct self-protection.
  20. present: Do not buzz unknown people in is a clear personal protective action.
  21. present: The strategies section instructs recipients how to reduce package-theft risk.
  22. present: Protective action language covers access control, locking, and secure delivery.
  23. present: Harm Reduction Strategies give multiple do-this instructions to the community.
  24. present: Recipients are guided to secure building entry and package handling practices.
  25. present: Guidance present through explicit lock, refuse-buzz-in, and package-security steps.
• Timepresent25/25

  Final assessment

  Unanimous present: February 23, 2026, at approximately 7:28 p.m., and February 24 at 4:32 p.m. and 11:25 p.m., are explicit temporal cues.

  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: Time is February 23, 2026, at approximately 7:28 p.m., plus Feb 24 times.
  2. present: Dates and clock times appear: February 23 at 7:28 p.m. and February 24 at 4:32 p.m. and 11:25 p.m.
  3. present: Temporal cues include Monday February 23rd and Tuesday February 24th with clock times.
  4. present: The alert states approximately 7:28 p.m. on Monday, February 23rd, 2026.
  5. present: Time present via full dates plus afternoon and evening clock times.
  6. present: When: February 23, 2026, around 7:28 p.m., then February 24 at 4:32 p.m. and 11:25 p.m.
  7. present: Clock times 7:28 p.m., 4:32 p.m., and 11:25 p.m. mark the incident windows.
  8. present: Calendar dates and approximate hours are both given for three incidents.
  9. present: February 23rd and 24th, 2026, anchor when the package burglaries occurred.
  10. present: Time element met by two dates and three p.m. timestamps.
  11. present: The narrative includes approximately 7:28 p.m. as the first event time.
  12. present: 4:32 p.m. at 150 Claremont Ave is an additional temporal marker.
  13. present: Dates February 23-24, 2026, plus three clock times satisfy time.
  14. present: Readers learn the crimes occurred on stated dates with clock times.
  15. present: Explicit clock times and calendar dates convey when.
  16. present: Occurrence timing spans 7:28 p.m. on Feb 23 through 11:25 p.m. on Feb 24.
  17. present: The third incident is timestamped at 11:25 p.m. at 523 West 112th Street.
  18. present: Time is not missing: dates and p.m. times are written out.
  19. present: February 23rd, 2026, and 7:28 p.m. are clear temporal references.
  20. present: Three minute-level times bookend the multi-day package crimes.
  21. present: The alert timestamps the first burglary at about 7:28 p.m. that evening.
  22. present: Date and approximate times of occurrence are both present.
  23. present: Temporal language includes Monday, February 23rd, 2026, and Tuesday, February 24th, 2026.
  24. present: When is answered by two dates plus 7:28 p.m., 4:32 p.m., and 11:25 p.m.
  25. present: Full dates with afternoon and evening times satisfy the time element.
• Impactabsent5/25

  Final assessment

  Majority absent (20 of 25): naming burglaries and package thefts without separate severity language fails impact. Minority treat Clery serious or continuous threat boilerplate as impact.

  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: Burglaries and package thefts are named without separate severity or harm wording.
  2. absent: No line states injuries, danger level, or what the crimes could do to people.
  3. absent: Impact is absent beyond naming the crime types themselves.
  4. present: Clery disclaimer says serious or continuous threat to the community, which is severity language.
  5. absent: Package removal is described factually without consequence phrasing such as dangerous.
  6. absent: The text does not say the offender is armed or that residents face personal injury risk.
  7. absent: Impact element fails under a strict reading that hazard names alone do not count.
  8. present: Serious or continuous threat in the Clery notice conveys community-level impact.
  9. absent: Piggybacking entry and package taking are events, not stated consequences or severity.
  10. absent: No injuries, no property loss amount, and no life-safety severity phrase appear.
  11. absent: Harm reduction tips imply risk context but do not state impact severity.
  12. absent: Naming burglaries and package thefts does not by itself satisfy impact.
  13. present: The disclaimer frames the crimes as a serious or continuous community threat.
  14. absent: Impact is not conveyed with words like dangerous, life-threatening, or may cause harm.
  15. absent: The body reports what happened without saying how severe the outcomes were.
  16. absent: Removed several packages describes sequence, not impact severity.
  17. absent: Strict rubric: hazard labels without consequence language yield I absent.
  18. present: Serious or continuous threat language can be read as explicit community impact.
  19. absent: No secondary effects such as injuries treated or trauma severity are described.
  20. absent: The alert stops short of stating what the hazard could do beyond naming it.
  21. absent: Consequence language for people is missing outside crime type names.
  22. absent: Impact absent: no severity adjective and no harm-to-people clause in the narrative.
  23. present: Clery serious or continuous threat clause states why the community faces impact.
  24. absent: Burglaries and package thefts names alone do not equal impact under the rubric.
  25. absent: No explicit statement of potential injury, danger, or property damage severity.