Corrections: every score change, dated and explained
For a site whose product is a set of scores, a visible corrections record is worth more than an unblemished-looking one.
Why this page exists
Because we will get things wrong. Registers change, certificates lapse, terms are rewritten, and we occasionally misread a document like anyone else. A site that scores other organisations and has no visible mechanism for its own errors is asking for a trust it has not earned.
So corrections are published rather than quietly applied. If a score moves, the reason is on the record.
What counts as a correction
A factual error: a wrong register status, a misattributed licence, an out-of-date payout window, a misquoted term, a wrong legal age, a broken link to a primary document.
A scoring error: a criterion awarded points the evidence does not support, or denied points the evidence does support.
A material omission: a criterion we scored zero for lack of a source when a source existed and was findable.
What is not a correction
A disagreement with the weights. If you think the complaint route should be worth less than a testing certificate, that is a legitimate argument about the rubric rather than an error in applying it — and we would genuinely like to hear it, at contact. Our method page exists to make that argument possible, and it names the two decisions we consider most arguable.
A request from an operator to be ranked higher, or to have an unfavourable criterion removed. Those are recorded rather than acted on.
A different opinion about an operator's quality. We do not score enjoyment, game selection or support friendliness, so there is nothing to correct.
How to report one
Write to [email protected] with three things: the page, the specific claim or criterion, and where possible a link to the primary document that settles it. A message with the document attached is usually resolved the same day. A message telling us a score seems wrong, without a criterion, is much harder to act on because the rubric is the only thing we can check against.
You do not need to identify yourself, and we will not publish who reported an error unless you ask us to.
What happens next
We check the claim against a primary source, not against the report. If it holds, the page is corrected and a note recording what changed and when is added.
If the error affected a score, the score changes and so does the operator's position in any table it appears in. We do not preserve an ordering for the sake of consistency.
If we conclude the original was right, we say so to the person who reported it and explain what we read. That reply is often more useful than a correction would have been.
Corrections and our commercial interest
The awkward case is a correction that lowers the score of an operator we earn commission from. It gets applied on the same terms as any other, and the note stays on the page.
The reverse case is worth naming too: a correction that raises a score is still a correction, and we publish those with the same visibility rather than absorbing good news silently.
The record
Confirmed corrections are recorded on the page they affect. Where a correction changes something material about how the site works — a weight, a definition, a rule about what we will publish — it is noted on the method page as well, because that is where a reader checking our reasoning will look.
Questions about this site
What gets logged here?
Any change to a score, a factual claim, or a page's conclusion — including changes that make an operator look better. A typo does not get an entry; a wrong number does.
How do I report an error?
Email [email protected] with the page and, if you have it, the document that contradicts us. A primary source moves a correction through in days; an assertion without one takes longer because we have to find the document ourselves.
Will you remove a review if an operator asks?
No. We will correct a factual error on any page, promptly and in writing. We will not remove an unfavourable finding, and a commercial relationship does not change that answer — the affiliate arrangement is disclosed separately in the affiliate disclosure.
Do you correct silently?
Not for anything that changes a score or a conclusion. Silent editing is how a site rewrites its own history, and a methodology page is worthless on a domain that does it.
What if you cannot verify a claim either way?
Then the page says the record is silent, and the relevant criterion scores what the available evidence supports rather than what we suspect. An unverifiable claim is not a neutral result and is never treated as one.