Dispute a record

Self-interest is labelled, never blocked

A politician correcting their own record is exactly the correction the movement wants. The person with the strongest incentive to find an error is also the person most likely to find one.

So a submission from the subject is flagged as self-interested — visibly, to reviewers — and then reviewed on its merits. The movement does not refuse information because of who it came from; it refuses to hide who it came from.

Staff can file on your behalf

Delegation is filable on day one. It renders unverified until an admin confirms it, and the correction is reviewed in the meantime.

Requiring the paperwork before accepting a correction would mean publishing something wrong for longer than necessary, which is a strange thing for an accuracy process to do.

What to file

Point at the row. "This vote is recorded as a yes; the roll call shows a no" is actionable in minutes.

Cite the public record. A citation closes the question without anybody weighing your word against ours.

Separate the arithmetic from the inputs. If a vote is recorded wrongly, that is a correction. If you think the weights are wrong, that is a different and entirely fair argument — and the right place to make it is against the published equations, in public, where everybody can see it.

What you get back

Approved, sent back for changes, or declined. The last two carry a mandatory stated reason, shown to you in the reviewer's own words. Nothing is silently dropped, and nothing is hard-deleted — what the movement was asked and chose not to do is part of its record too.

The posture that binds every page about you

• State what somebody did or said, with a citation — never what they are or what they wanted.
• No claim about a living person without a source.
• An unreviewed submission is never rendered publicly.
• An absence is never rendered as a finding — the gray-brown flamingo means not assessed, and must never read as a judgment.
• The percentage is of an award, and the page says so in words.

What the channel is not

It is not a route to remove an accurate record, and it is not a negotiation over the arithmetic. Both the acts and the equations are public, which is what makes the whole thing arguable in the first place.