On August 25, 2025, false reports of shots fired near Norlin Library triggered a campus-wide shelter-in-place order at CU Boulder lasting over three hours. The online extremist group Purgatory later claimed responsibility for the hoax, which was part of a wave of university swatting incidents.
5 messages in sequence · 5 verified verbatim
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.
CU EMERGENCY ALERT: Police activity near Norlin Library. Campus-wide shelter in place issued. Emergency personnel responding. Avoid area.
Final assessment
All 25 reads agree the sender is present; the message opens with the branded "CU EMERGENCY ALERT".
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.
Final assessment
All 25 reads agree no specific hazard is named; the alert cites only "Police activity".
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.
Final assessment
All reads agree a location is present, naming Norlin Library and the area.
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.
Final assessment
All 25 reads agree guidance is present; recipients are told to shelter in place and avoid the area.
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.
Final assessment
All 25 reads agree no timing is present; no clock time, date, or recency cue appears.
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.
Final assessment
Final call absent; a strong majority found no stated harm or consequence beyond the hazard or notice, with minimal dissent.
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.
Systematic AI judgments with visible reasoning, not human-validated codings.
About this analysisCampus Alert Archive. "University of Colorado Boulder: False shots-fired reports prompted a shelter-in-place lasting more than three hours." Incident of August 25, 2025. Added May 2026; last updated July 2026. https://campusalertarchive.com/case/university-of-colorado-boulder-swatting-2025-08-25/
Alert text quoted on this page remains the work of the issuing institution; the archive is a secondary source.