Verdika Civic
Verified public opinion.
Citizens rate the institutions and services that serve them. Every contributor is a verified real person, so one person cannot become a hundred voices.
What it is
Public opinion with an identity guarantee behind it.
A public platform where people rate and review the institutions and officials that serve them. Every rating counts once, and the result cannot be inflated by a campaign, an automated account, or one determined group with many phones.
Why this is different
Public opinion research has an old problem: you cannot see who is answering.
Online polls are gamed
Anyone motivated enough can vote as many times as they have addresses.
Social sentiment measures the loudest
Not what people think, but what the most active accounts repeat.
Surveys sample and extrapolate
A few hundred responses stand in for millions of people.
Comments reward free time
The record reflects who had the most of it, not who was affected.
None of them can tell you whether a thousand responses came from a thousand people.
How verification works
Every participant, verified
Three checks run before anyone is counted. Only when all three pass can that person take part.
CHECK 01
A genuine document
The person presents a government-issued identity document. The document itself is checked to be real, not a photograph of a photograph or a forgery.
CHECK 02
A live human being
The person is confirmed to be physically present and alive at that moment. Not a photograph, not a recording, not a mask, not a generated image.
CHECK 03
The same person, once
The live person is matched to the photograph on their document, and to everyone who has already taken part, so one person cannot return as another.
How it works
From a published subject to a picture that holds.
The subject is published
An institution, a service, an office or a programme.
Citizens are verified
Each person confirms they are a real, live human being matched to a genuine identity document. Once verified, they can participate.
They rate and comment
Structured ratings and open comments, from their own phone, on what they have directly experienced.
The picture builds
Ratings aggregate over time, by location and by category, with every open comment readable in full.
Nobody can distort it
A person who returns with a new email, a new phone number or a new name is recognised and cannot rate the same subject twice.
Information integrity
Two layers. Never one mystery score.
Verified evidence and public opinion appear together on Verdika, but are never combined into one unexplained number, one colour signal or one ranking.
Every rating carries its sample size, its rating period, its geography and its freshness. Calculated analysis carries its sources, its method and its last update.
What a figure represents is always visible beside it.
Why people are willing to answer
Verified, and still anonymous.
This is the part most people assume is impossible. If you check who somebody is, surely you know what they said.
On Verdika you do not. Identity and content are held apart. The platform proves a real, distinct person contributed. It does not attach their name to their rating, and the two cannot be joined afterwards.
That matters more here than anywhere else Verdika is used. People are rating a hospital they still need, a licensing office they will visit again, an institution with power over them. Without anonymity you do not get honesty. Without verification you do not get truth. Verdika gives both at once.
Not an identity check
An identity check asks whether one person is who they claim, then discards the answer. This asks whether a whole population of contributors were different real people, and keeps an answer that holds when the finding is quoted back at you.
The hardest version of the problem
An election has a member register to check against. Open public opinion has none, participation is voluntary, and people are motivated to distort it. This is where the technology is proved.
Nothing to buy your way into
A subject cannot pay to change its rating, and no advertiser or sponsor can influence a score. Say so plainly to anyone who asks, because they will ask.
Who this is for
Institutions that need to know what people think, and prove it.
Media houses and publishers
Verified public sentiment as original, defensible journalism.
Development agencies and funders
Beneficiary feedback that can be reported to a board or a donor.
Government institutions
Citizen satisfaction measurement for services, agencies and programmes, where the result must withstand scrutiny.
Regulators and ombudsman offices
Public experience of regulated services, gathered without a sampling argument.
Research institutions and think tanks
Population sentiment with an identity guarantee behind every contribution.
Civil society and governance bodies
Accountability work grounded in verified contributions rather than volume.
What it is used for
Four questions it answers well.
- Service quality. How citizens actually experience a hospital, an agency, a licensing office or a utility.
- Programme evaluation. Whether the people a programme was built for say it reached them.
- Sentiment over time. How opinion on an institution or a policy moves across months, to the same verification standard at every point.
- Accountability journalism. A verified public rating is a story that stands up when it is challenged.
Scope a Civic deployment
Deployments are scoped to the subject, the population and the reporting you need. Sponsored deployments, institutional licences and programme-specific engagements are all available.