Integration Patterns
Choose the right moderation strategy for your platform
Select the optimal content moderation workflow based on your accuracy needs, budget constraints, and scale requirements. Each pattern offers a different balance of cost, speed, and precision.
Choosing Your Pattern
Content moderation is not one-size-fits-all. Your choice depends on factors like business stage, budget, content volume, accuracy requirements, and user expectations. These four proven patterns cover the most common scenarios.
Each pattern can be implemented using Outharm's AI and manual moderation services, allowing you to start simple and evolve your approach as your platform grows.
Pattern 1: Solo Automated Moderation
Perfect for startups and growing platforms where cost efficiency is paramount. Every moderation decision—whether from user reports, content uploads, or automated scans—is handled by AI. This pattern prioritizes speed and affordability over precision.
Solo Automated Workflow
User A
Posts content
Trigger
Report/Scan
AI
Decides
Action
Remove/Keep
1. Content Goes Live
"Party pics posted"
2. Moderation Triggered
User reports OR auto-scan
3. AI Reviews
Instant analysis & decision
4. Action Taken
Content removed/approved
How It Works
- Content gets published on your platform
- TRIGGER: User reports content / Auto-scan detects issue / Internal flag
- Your platform sends flagged content to Outharm AI
- AI makes final decision: approve or remove
- Action executed immediately - no human review
✅ Pros
- • Lowest cost - no human moderators needed
- • Instant decisions - no waiting times
- • Scales infinitely with content volume
- • 24/7 operation without breaks
- • Consistent decision criteria
- • Simple integration and maintenance
❌ Cons
- • AI accuracy limitations, especially for nuanced content
- • No appeal mechanism for users
- • May struggle with cultural context and sarcasm
- • False positives can frustrate legitimate users
- • No human oversight for edge cases
💡 Best For
Early-stage platforms, budget-conscious operations, and scenarios where moderation speed matters more than perfect accuracy. Ideal when your content types are straightforward and you need to minimize operational costs.
Pattern 2: Solo Manual Moderation
When accuracy is absolutely critical and budget allows for human review. Every moderation decision goes through experienced human moderators who understand context, nuance, and cultural sensitivities. This is traditional, high-quality content moderation.
Solo Manual Workflow
User A
Posts content
Trigger
Report/Audit
Human
Reviews
Action
Remove/Keep
1. Content Goes Live
"Political discussion"
2. Moderation Triggered
User reports OR audit
3. Human Reviews
Expert analysis & context
4. Action Taken
Detailed reasoning provided
How It Works
- Content gets published on your platform
- TRIGGER: User reports content / Auto-scan / Scheduled audit
- Your platform sends flagged content directly to Outharm manual review
- Human expert analyzes context, sources, cultural factors
- Human makes final decision with detailed reasoning
✅ Pros
- • Highest accuracy - humans understand context
- • Handles complex, nuanced cases perfectly
- • Cultural sensitivity and sarcasm detection
- • Detailed reasoning for each decision
- • Users trust human-verified results
- • Can establish case precedents
❌ Cons
- • Expensive - highest cost per moderation
- • Slower response times (hours to days)
- • Limited scalability with content volume
- • Requires moderation team availability
- • Can create backlogs during peak times
💡 Best For
Premium platforms, sensitive content areas (news, politics, healthcare), professional communities, or any scenario where moderation accuracy is more important than speed and cost. Best for established businesses with moderation budget.
Pattern 3: Hybrid Moderation on Demand
The best of both worlds. AI handles initial moderation for speed and cost efficiency, but users can appeal AI decisions or additional reports can trigger human review. This balances accuracy with cost-effectiveness while providing user recourse.
Hybrid On-Demand Workflow
Stage 1: First Report → AI Review
Posts
Report
AI Review
Removed
IF user appeals OR more reports OR AI unsure
⬇️Stage 2: Escalation → Human Review
Appeal
Human
Restored
Example Flow
How It Works
- FIRST TRIGGER: User reports content → Goes to AI for fast decision
- ESCALATION TRIGGERS: User appeals AI decision / Repeat reports / Low AI confidence
- When escalated, content goes to human expert review
- Human makes final decision, often overturning AI when needed
- Most content stays AI-only (cost-effective), complex cases get human attention
✅ Pros
- • Cost-effective: Most decisions are AI-only
- • Fast initial response for most content
- • Users have appeal mechanism
- • Human oversight for controversial cases
- • Self-improving system over time
- • Balance of speed, cost, and accuracy
❌ Cons
- • More complex implementation (two workflows)
- • Need appeal/escalation mechanisms
- • Variable response times based on escalation
- • Requires both AI and manual capacity
- • Users might abuse appeal system
💡 Best For
Growing platforms that want to balance cost with accuracy. Perfect when you want to give users recourse for AI decisions and catch AI mistakes without the full expense of manual-only moderation. Ideal for content-rich platforms with engaged user bases.
Pattern 4: Moderate Everything
Maximum protection with comprehensive coverage. All content going public gets AI moderation first to prevent harmful content from reaching users. If content later gets reported or appeals are made, it escalates to human review. This prioritizes user safety over cost optimization.
Moderate Everything Workflow
Pre-Publication: AI Screens ALL Content
Creates
AI Screen
Publish
AI approves → goes live | AI rejects → blocked
Post-Publication: Human Review for Edge Cases
Scenario 1: Content Gets Reported
User reports → Human reviews
Scenario 2: User Appeals Block
User appeals → Human reviews
Two-Layer Protection
How It Works
- PRE-PUBLISH TRIGGER: All content going public → AI screens before publishing
- AI approves/blocks content before users see it
- POST-PUBLISH TRIGGERS: Users report published content / Appeal AI rejections
- Post-publish triggers send content to human review
- Comprehensive protection: AI prevents + humans handle edge cases
✅ Pros
- • Maximum user protection - harmful content rarely goes live
- • Proactive prevention rather than reactive cleanup
- • Human oversight still available for edge cases
- • Better brand safety and platform reputation
- • Reduces user exposure to harmful content
- • Comprehensive coverage of all public content
❌ Cons
- • Higher cost - AI moderates ALL public content
- • False positives can impact user experience
- • May slow down content publication flow
- • Over-moderation risk if AI is too strict
- • Complex workflow with multiple stages
- • Requires both AI and human capacity
💡 Best For
Platforms prioritizing user safety and brand protection over cost optimization. Ideal for family-friendly platforms, educational content, news sites, or any scenario where harmful content exposure must be minimized. Best when you can afford comprehensive pre-publication screening.
Pattern Comparison
| Pattern | Speed | Accuracy | Cost | Complexity | User Safety |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Solo Automated | High | High | Low | Low | High |
| Solo Manual | Low | Highest | High | Low | Highest |
| Hybrid on Demand | Medium | High+ | Medium | Medium | High+ |
| Moderate Everything | Medium | Highest | High | High | Highest |
Choosing the Right Pattern
Start with Solo Automated if:
- • You're in early-stage/startup phase
- • Budget constraints are primary concern
- • Content types are relatively straightforward
- • Speed matters more than perfect accuracy
- • You need to minimize operational overhead
Consider Solo Manual if:
- • Accuracy is absolutely critical
- • You handle sensitive content (news, health, politics)
- • Moderation mistakes have serious consequences
- • You have sufficient budget for human review
- • Content volume is manageable
Choose Hybrid on Demand if:
- • You want to balance cost with accuracy
- • Users need appeal mechanisms
- • Most content is straightforward, some complex
- • You can handle variable response times
- • Growing platform with evolving needs
Go with Moderate Everything if:
- • User safety is the top priority
- • Brand reputation is critically important
- • You can afford comprehensive screening
- • Family-friendly or educational platform
- • Preventing harm trumps cost concerns
Implementation Considerations
Evolution Path: Most successful platforms start with Solo Automated moderation and evolve based on growth, user feedback, and business requirements. You can upgrade patterns as your platform matures.
Monitor Key Metrics: Track false positive rates, user appeals, moderation response times, and community satisfaction to understand when your current pattern needs adjustment.
Plan for Scale: Consider how each pattern handles growth in content volume, user base, and geographic expansion. Some patterns scale better than others.
User Communication: Be transparent about your moderation approach. Users appreciate knowing whether decisions come from AI or humans, and what recourse they have.
Ready to Get Started?
Now that you've chosen your moderation pattern, it's time to implement it. Start with our Quick Start guide for immediate setup, or explore Best Practices for strategic implementation guidance.
Quick Start Guide
Implement your chosen pattern in 5 minutes
Best Practices
Strategic implementation guidelines
Related Documentation
- • Best Practices - Strategic implementation guidelines
- • Automated Moderation - AI moderation setup and configuration
- • Manual Moderation - Human review workflows
- • Webhooks - Automate pattern workflows
- • Categories - Configure content types for moderation
- • Quick Start - Get started with your chosen pattern