Methodology

The Sighted method: why we don't accept anonymous submissions

A pseudonymous handle is fine. A black-box submission with no traceable chain of custody isn't — and the reasons aren't what most people guess.

By Vera Halliday4 min read
A manila evidence folder under a single warm overhead lamp on a dark wooden desk, redacted documents partially visible.

We get this question every couple of weeks, usually phrased as some variant of: "wouldn't you get more reports if people could file anonymously?" Yes, we would. We choose not to. The reasoning isn't about identifying witnesses — it's about preserving the parts of the report that make it useful months after the fact.

What anonymous submission would actually mean

To be specific: when people ask for "anonymous" reporting, they usually mean one of three things, and the three things have very different implications.

  • Public-facing anonymity. The reporter has an account, but their name doesn't appear on the report. We already do this — toggle the "Submit anonymously" checkbox during reporting and the public surface attributes the report to "Witness — verified observer" with no further identification.
  • Pseudonymous accounts. The handle on the account is a pseudonym, the email is on a forwarder, and the reporter would prefer we never knew their legal name. We're fine with this. The handle is what we need, not the name.
  • True anonymity. No account at all. Submit, vanish. This is the version we don't allow, and it's worth being clear about why.

The real reason: phase 2 and 3 of every report

A typical Sighted report goes through three phases, and only the first one ends at submission.

  • Phase 1 — Initial filing. What the witness saw, when, where, with whatever media they had. Usually within hours of the event.
  • Phase 2 — Corroboration window. The first 24 to 72 hours after publication, when other people who saw the same thing find the report and file alongside it.
  • Phase 3 — Investigator follow-up. Days to weeks later, when a verified investigator picks the report up and runs their own checks.

Phases 2 and 3 both depend on being able to reach the original witness. If a second observer corroborates with a detail the first witness didn't mention, we want to be able to ask the first witness whether they remember it. If an investigator's flight-data check shows a contradiction with the witness's altitude estimate, we want to be able to ask the witness how they derived that estimate.

None of that is possible with a true-anonymous submission. The report becomes a static artefact — useful for the headline, useless for the follow-up. Which means the report gets worse over time, not better.

What we actually do with the account behind a report

Worth being explicit so nobody has to guess:

  • The account email is visible only to you and the moderation team.
  • The only time we'd contact you about a specific report is to ask a follow-up question relevant to that report.
  • We don't share your email with investigators, with other users, or with third-party services. The handle they see is your public handle.
  • We never use the address for marketing. Sighted doesn't run a marketing list. The weekly digest is opt-in, separate, and unsubscribe is a single click.
  • Account deletion wipes the email. The report stays attached to a tombstone account labelled "Deleted reporter."

The full text of the policy is on the privacy page, but the short version is: a pseudonymous handle is enough. The mailbox behind it can be a Gmail you'll delete next year, a forwarder, or a privacy-relay address. We need a way to reach you. We don't need to know who you are.

Your turn

Saw something in the sky?

Report it in about two minutes. Sighted turns what you saw into a mapped public record, and shows you who else saw it too.