Skip to content
MadeOverHere

Verification policy

Directories rot because nobody goes back. This one is built so that going back is the normal state of affairs, and so that anything not yet checked looks unchecked rather than authoritative.

What counts as verification

  1. 1

    The source must be the producer's own site

    For anything a company declares about itself — where it manufactures, where it hosts, how long the warranty runs — the citation has to live on a domain that company owns. The validator enforces this: mark a source as coming from the producer and point it at a blog post, and the build fails.

  2. 2

    The page must say it, in words we can quote

    Each piece of evidence carries a verbatim quote. If the sentence cannot be quoted, the claim is not verified — it is reported at best, and reported evidence is capped at 60% of its value.

  3. 3

    The date is part of the claim

    Every source records the day it was retrieved. That date is what makes a claim auditable later, and what drives the decay curve: full value for 12 months, then progressively less.

  4. 4

    Ownership goes to the register

    Company control is the one thing we do not take a company's word for when we can avoid it. Registers, filings and regulator disclosures outrank the About page.

  5. 5

    Contradictions are shown, not resolved quietly

    Where sources disagree, the claim is marked disputed with a note explaining the conflict. Disputed claims score zero — the point is to surface the disagreement, not to pick a winner.

Current state of the library

16

Published records

16

Records with no evidence yet

0

Records with ageing sources

These numbers are computed at build time from the content itself, not maintained by hand. When they look bad, they are supposed to.

The library is currently seeded, not verified. The initial records were entered from public knowledge so the structure could be tested end to end. Every claim on them is marked unverified and scores zero until a source is cited. This is the backlog, and it is deliberately visible.

Re-verification

A claim does not stay true because it was true once. Records surface for re-checking when any source passes 12 months, when a product changes generation, or when someone reports a change. The re-check is the same process as the first check, and it updates the retrieval date rather than adding a second opinion.

The failure mode this is designed against is well documented in other directories: a browser listed as Norwegian years after its owner changed continent, a service listed as EU-hosted after it migrated. Neither entry was ever a lie. Both were simply never checked again.

Spotted something out of date?

Corrections are the most useful contribution anyone can make here.

How to submit a correction