Content policy
Brewprint is for game build boards. These are the rules, what happens when they are broken, and how to appeal.What you may post
Screenshots from games, your own notes, and boards you assembled. Pasting a screenshot of a skill, item or card is the entire point of the tool.
What you may not post
Sexual content, graphic violence, hate speech or harassment, content that targets a private individual, spam and advertising, and material you have no right to post. Screenshots of other people’s private information — chat logs naming someone, account details, real names — are not permitted even when the game produced them.
Illegal content
Child sexual abuse material and other content that is illegal to possess is handled differently from everything else on this page. It is not quietly deleted: the account is banned, the material is preserved as required, and it is reported to the appropriate authorities. Deleting evidence is not moderation, and pretending otherwise would help nobody.
How images are checked
Every uploaded image is scanned before it can be shown to anyone. Until it has been reviewed it stays visible only to you — a board with an unreviewed image simply is not public yet. That is enforced by the database rather than by a setting, so there is no state in which an unchecked image is publicly readable.
What happens when a rule is broken
Content that fails a scan is refused and the account takes a strike. Strikes accumulate: enough of them is a temporary timeout, more is a ban. The thresholds are deliberately adjustable rather than fixed, because the right numbers are the ones real abuse teaches us, not the ones guessed at up front.
Anyone signed in can report a brew or a sticker. Reports are reviewed by hand. Enough independent reports on one board hides it pending that review — hidden, not deleted, so that dismissing the reports puts it straight back.
Appeals
Appeals are handled by a person reading an email, not by a system. Write to the address on the contact page with what was removed and why you think it should not have been. This is honestly described as manual because it is manual; an automated appeals process that nobody has built yet would be a worse promise than a slow answer.