Methodology

1. Every entry cites its sources

No entry is published without at least one citation, and the requirement is enforced by the software rather than by memory. An entry with no source will not build.

Sources are labeled by type: enforcement action, court filing, regulatory record, corporate registration, published journalism, archived capture of the operator's own public claims, or a firsthand report submitted to us. Wherever possible we also store an independent archived copy, because material tends to disappear once an entry goes live.

2. We count facts. We do not score people.

There is no severity rating on this site, no scam score, and no stars. That is a deliberate design decision, not an omission.

A number we invent is our opinion wearing the costume of a measurement. A number we count is a citation. So rather than telling you an operator rates 8.4 out of 10, an entry shows you the things you can check:

Every one of those figures traces to a source you can open yourself. It is a harsher picture than any rating we could assign, and unlike a rating, there is nothing in it to argue with.

3. Claims are labeled by evidence tier

The difference between an official proceeding and an unverified complaint is never blurred. The tier appears on the entry itself, not in the fine print.

Documented

Subject of a regulatory action, lawsuit, or other official proceeding on the public record.

Reported

Firsthand accounts submitted by people who paid. Not independently adjudicated.

Disputed

The operator has responded. Their reply is published alongside the entry, unedited.

Resolved

Refunded, settled, ceased operating, or the claim did not hold up. Kept for the record.

An entry marked Reported is an allegation made by a third party. It is published because a pattern of independent accounts is itself a fact worth recording. It is not a finding that fraud occurred, and it is never presented as one.

4. Identity is verified before a name is published

Publishing about the wrong person who happens to share a name is the most serious failure a project like this can commit, and the most common. Every entry therefore requires at least one hard identifier beyond the name: a profile URL, a company registration number, a website, or a verified handle.

Where identity cannot be pinned to that standard, the entry does not run.

5. Anyone named has a permanent right of reply

We attempt to contact every operator before publication and log each attempt with its date. If they respond, their reply is published on the entry word for word. We do not summarize it, rebut it line by line, or bury it at the bottom.

If they do not respond, the entry says so and shows the dates we tried. Every entry also carries a permanent Dispute this entry button that never expires, whether the entry is a week or five years old.

6. Corrections are published, not quietly patched

When we get something wrong we fix it and log the correction on the entry with its date. Corrections stay visible permanently. A project that has never published a correction is either brand new or not being honest.

If a claim does not hold up, the entry is marked Resolved and the reason is stated. Entries are not silently deleted, because a disappearing record is not a record.

7. We never charge for removal, amendment, or reply

Not for takedown, not for arbitration, not for expedited review, not for a badge. There is no paid tier and no advertising from anyone who could appear in the database.

Reputation-management sites that monetize removal turn a public record into a toll booth. That business model is the reason the entire category is distrusted, and it is permanently off the table here.

8. What is out of scope

• Private individuals not operating a business or selling a service.
• Home addresses, personal phone numbers, family members, and other personal data of any kind.
• Single uncorroborated complaints with no documentation attached.
• Ordinary commercial disputes. A project that ran late or a deliverable someone disliked is not fraud.
• Anything a submitter is contractually barred from disclosing.

9. How submissions are handled

Reports can be submitted without a name. We ask for contact details only so a report can be corroborated, and a report will never be published in a form that identifies its submitter without explicit permission.

Understand the limit of that promise. If a court orders disclosure of submitter information, no website can protect you from that, and anyone claiming otherwise is lying. Submit accordingly, and keep your own copies of your evidence.

Questions about this policy, or about a specific entry, go to [email protected]. Every message is read. Shorter answers to common questions are on the FAQ.