Methodology

The standing rule: hands-on before verdicts. Every claim in a Lab piece is graded by the seat test — which seat was I in when I learned this?

• Ran itI used the tool in real work, in my own seat. The only standing that supports a recommendation.
• AdjacentI've worked the same stack or the same problem, but not this exact tool. I can explain mechanism and context; the piece says so, and the verdict waits.
• Read itI've only read about it. Read-it-only standing never produces a recommendation — at most it produces coverage, labeled as coverage.

The standing is declared in the piece itself, so you can weigh every claim by the seat it was written from.

• Sponsored work is labeled. A paid or sponsored piece carries a visible Sponsored badge naming the sponsor — on the piece itself, not buried in a footer.
• Partner links are disclosed. Some outbound links are tracked partner links; the pages that carry them say so. A commission never decides what gets covered or how anything ranks.
• Positions are disclosed. On markets surfaces the published book is the disclosure — if I hold it, it's in the published positions. How that works is documented in the investing research methodology.

When something here turns out to be wrong, it gets corrected in place, with a note on the piece saying what changed. No silent rewrites, no quiet deletions. A wrong verdict is information; hiding it would be the real failure.

• No pay-for-review. A verdict is not for sale, in any packaging. Sponsorship buys a labeled slot, never a conclusion.
• No embargoed scores traded for access. If early access comes with conditions on what the verdict can be, I decline the access.
• No vendor benchmark reprints presented as independent. A vendor's numbers are labeled as the vendor's. If I didn't run it, it is not presented as mine.