Method: How These Filings Are Sourced

Each filing attaches its sources and states its limits so you can follow the documents and decide what the evidence supports. This page explains that process in one place.

The standard: if it can't be linked, it doesn't get stated as fact

Every public claim on this site needs a public, linkable source. That means one of four things: a news article, a court or bankruptcy document, an archived capture of a page that might change or disappear, or the subject's own published statement. If a claim cannot be tied to something a reader can open and read, it does not get stated as fact. It either gets cut, or it gets labeled as unverified and treated accordingly.

The "Receipts · sources" block at the bottom of each filing is part of the reporting. The body explains the argument; the source list lets you inspect its basis.

Source grading: [P], [C], [X]

Not all sources carry the same weight, so claims are graded by the strength of what backs them.

[P]: primary. The original document, filing, or statement itself: the bankruptcy docket, the acquisition press release, the company's own announcement, the archived page captured at a known timestamp. A primary source is the thing, not a description of the thing. When a filing says a company sold a platform for a specific dollar figure, the goal is to put the filing that says so directly in your hands.
[C]: corroborated. A claim confirmed independently, usually because a primary document is paired with separate reporting that reaches the same fact, or because two unrelated sources line up. Where a number is inferred rather than officially disclosed, the inference and the sources behind it are shown, not hidden.
[X]: unverified. Something that has been claimed but not confirmed. This is never asserted as fact. It is labeled as unverified wherever it appears, and the filing says plainly what would be needed to move it. If a hacking crew lists a vendor on a leak site and the vendor has not commented, that is [X]: the listing is a fact, the breach is not.

To be exact about what these letters are: they are the working vocabulary behind the filings, not tags printed on them. Apart from this page, no page on this site displays a [P], [C] or [X] mark. What the pages do instead is say it in words — Amplify and Who owns Libby both carry an explicit section on what the evidence does not establish, and other filings state their limits inline. If you want to hold a page to this standard, that is what to look for. Where the documents stop, the inferences start, and the post should say which is which.

Naming people

The grades above answer whether a claim is true. They do not answer whether naming a person is warranted, so here is that standard, added in September 2026 after a review of every page on this site found four places it had been broken.

A person is named only when the argument fails without the name. Otherwise the role stands in: OverDrive's first chief marketing officer, the executive director, the incorporator listed on the filing. Private individuals are not named at all, and forum posters are redacted.
A person's education, employer history, or credentials are reported only where the record ties them to a decision that person made. A background is not evidence of a motive, and “did not come from libraries” is not a finding.
Where someone is portrayed unfavorably, the page carries what they said in response, or says plainly that they were not asked. As of this writing the honest answer on most pages is that they were not asked, and the pages now say so rather than leaving the reader to assume otherwise.

What I have not claimed

Every filing states the limits of its own argument. There is, in most posts, an explicit passage separating what the documents establish from what they do not. This is on purpose. It is the difference between a structural argument and an accusation.

So the filings say things like "alleged" and "unverified" when a claim has not been confirmed, and they say a situation is "an open question, not fraud" when the facts raise a fair question but do not prove wrongdoing. When a single firm owns both a platform and a publisher, the documented fact is the ownership structure; the post does not claim coordination it cannot evidence, and it says so directly. Drawing that line is not hedging. It is the argument staying honest about its own reach.

Corrections

Errors get fixed in the open. When a filing is wrong about something, it gets a dated correction line on the post itself, so the record shows what changed and when, rather than quietly editing the page as if the mistake never happened.

Corrections are welcome. If you can show a claim here is wrong, write to the byline address and bring the source; a correct record is the entire point.

No sponsors, no tracking

There is nothing here trying to sell you anything or follow you around. No sponsors, no affiliate links, no kickbacks, no upsell, and no analytics or ad tracking. Nobody is paying for placement, so nothing is shaded to keep them happy.

The site stores exactly one thing about visits: an anonymous page-view count, meaning a path and a tally and nothing else. It does not store or transmit IP addresses, cookies, user agents, referrers, timestamps, or sessions, and no analytics vendor is involved in the count. There is no newsletter and no sign-up form anywhere on the site, so nothing you do here is collected and sold on. The site is served through Cloudflare, which like any host or CDN sees the requests that reach it and receives browser error reports; that is the one third party in the path, and it is not something this site asks it to do.

That is the method: public sources, clearly stated limits, and visible corrections. If a filing falls short of that standard, please tell me.

Receipts and sources

This page describes the practice the filings on this site already follow. The "Receipts · sources" block at the foot of each post lists its primary and corroborating sources; see, for example, the source notes on the OverDrive / KKR ownership filing.

The page-view count is the only visitor data the site records: a path and a tally, with no IP address, cookie, user agent, referrer, timestamp, or session stored or transmitted, and no analytics vendor involved. The counts are public at /stats/. There is no form on the site, so nothing is collected from you and passed on. Cloudflare sits in front of the site as its CDN and sees traffic the way any host does.

What this page does not claim: that any filing is infallible, or that every source is primary. Some claims rest on corroboration or on disclosed inference rather than on a single original document, and the filings say so. The standard is that the basis is always shown, never that the basis is always the strongest possible. Corrections welcome at the byline address.

New filings

One note when something actually changes. Quiet by design, no sponsors, no kickbacks, no upsell.

Follow by RSS. No form, no tracker, nothing collected.