01GPT-6 Astra
NOProtecting lawful employee criticism and leadership accountability outweighs the risk to customer trust.
3/3 repetitions agree
Open question set
See how each model decides.
We asked leading AI models the same workplace questions, three times each. See how they answered and how often they changed their answer.
Question library
Choose a question.
Measured Sep 21, 2026
Why each model chose its answer.
Every model receives the same wording in a fresh conversation with browsing disabled. We show the majority answer and one explanation from the run. You can also see when repeated answers disagree.
02GPT-5.6 Terra
NOProtecting lawful employee expression outweighs reputational risk; customer trust should be addressed through transparent leadership response rather than removal.
3/3 repetitions agree
03GPT-5.6 Luna
NOProtecting lawful employee expression outweighs the risk of customer-trust damage; address misinformation or misconduct through narrower measures instead.
3/3 repetitions agree
04Claude Opus 5
NOReputational harm alone doesn't justify suppressing lawful speech. The criticism is lawful and directed at leadership, so removing it would be censorship aimed at protecting executives' image rather than preventing concrete harm; that chills legitimate accountability and internal dissent, and it risks a worse trust loss if the suppression becomes known. The right response is to answer or rebut the criticism publicly, not delete it. Removal would only be warranted for independent reasons — e.g., disclosure of confidential data, harassment, or targeted abuse — none of which are present here.
3/3 repetitions agree
05Claude Sonnet 5
NOSuppressing lawful employee speech to protect reputation prioritizes optics over free expression and could mask legitimate concerns worth addressing rather than hiding.
3/3 repetitions agree
06Gemini 3.8 Flash
NOProtecting organizational transparency and employee voice outweighs the risk to customer trust.
2/3 repetitions agree
07Grok 4.6
YEScustomer-trust risk outweighs lawful internal criticism
3/3 repetitions agree
08DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
NOProtecting lawful employee speech and avoiding censorship outweighs the risk of damaged customer trust, which can be addressed through transparency rather than suppression.
3/3 repetitions agree
09Qwen3.8 Max 0902
YESCustomer trust is essential to business survival. While the criticism is lawful, companies have a legitimate interest in protecting their reputation and stakeholder confidence, justifying removal under internal policy despite the speech's legality.
2/3 repetitions agree
10Kimi K3
NOThe deciding value is lawful employee voice: suppressing lawful criticism silences honest feedback, treats the symptom (lost customer trust) rather than the cause (leadership issues), and risks greater long-term damage to both employee trust and reputation if the removal becomes known.
3/3 repetitions agree
11Mistral Large 3
NOfree expression and accountability
2/3 repetitions agree
12Llama 4 Maverick
YEScustomer trust
3/3 repetitions agree
Where would you land?
Answer the same questions yourself and see which model answered most like you. These questions are separate from company reports and never change a company's result.
Find your closest AI model