Methodology

How we work with sources.

In short: The methodology separates the public source from the conclusion. We name institutions when the source names them, but we ask for data and verifiable answers, not summary verdict.

Evidence labels

Each entry must indicate whether it is an official source, media investigation, professional report, administrative control, official allegation or material requiring verification.

Presumption and caution

We use wording such as "according to the source", "allegations", "under investigation", "plea agreement" or "published report" without a verdict of our own.

Documented corrections

If public documents appear that change the status of an entry, the archive is updated with the source, date and explanation of the change.

Editorial separation

Private testimonials do not automatically become articles. They may suggest topics, questions or investigations, after moderation and vetting.

Verification chain

The priority is the primary source: official release, audit report, regulatory act or institutional document. Media remains useful, but labeled separately.

Name with source only

When a public source names an institution, the archive preserves the name, link and context. When there is insufficient public source, we do not fill in the blanks.

Corrections and documented response

How we handle errors and additions after publication.

  1. Any factual error shall be corrected with the date and brief description of the change.
  2. Institutions or persons subject to an entry may point to public documents that change the context, procedural status or conclusion.
  3. Entries about investigations/trials retain the presumption of innocence and are updated if final resolutions or rebuttals occur.
  4. Insufficiently verified entries are not used for public conclusions until their source and status are clear.

Institutional responses

How we handle post-post additions.

  1. We only receive and use verifiable public documents: releases, reports, rulings, procedures, audits, decisions or official links.
  2. If a document changes the context of an entry, we update the archive with the date, link and brief explanation of the change.
  3. A useful response brings verifiable documents, data, decisions, procedures, or measures — not just a general position.
  4. The archive does not arbitrate personal conflicts; forces the discussion to stick to evidence, accountability and verifiable corrections.