Skip to content

The As Stated Protocol

METHODOLOGY · v1.0

The Protocol is a fixed procedure, applied the same way to every case. It does not judge people. It asks whether a public claim can be substantiated by the person who made it.

Every case moves through the same intake pathway. Materiality, falsifiability, and reach determine the lane. Nothing about the Protocol depends on who the subject is, what they believe, or which direction their claim points.

§01The 48-hour cycle

    0h01/04

    Discovery

    A public claim surfaces — from monitoring, from a submission, or from the record itself. It is logged with its verbatim wording and source.

    6h02/04

    Intake

    The claim is scored against the gates: materiality, falsifiability, reach, process readiness. The gates decide the lane, or decline the case.

    24h03/04

    Engagement

    The subject is contacted and invited to substantiate their own words with qualifying sources. The ask is specific and the window is fixed.

    48h04/04

    Closure

    The case resolves to one of four standardized outcomes and is published in full — the claim, the sources, and the finding.

§02Two-lane structure

The lane determines how a case is resourced, never how strictly it is judged. The Evidence Standard is identical in both.

Lane A

Funded matched pledge

A backer pledges a sum, matched on the condition that the subject substantiates the claim. Substantiation releases the funds to a cause the subject names; failure to substantiate does not. The incentive rewards standing behind one's words.

  • Resourced engagement
  • Matched, conditional pledge
  • Same Evidence Standard

Lane B

Unfunded substantiation request

No money changes hands. The subject is simply asked to point to qualifying sources for the claim. Most cases run here. The record is the whole of the reward.

  • Standard engagement
  • No pledge attached
  • Same Evidence Standard
§03Escalation gates

§01

Materiality

Does the claim matter? A material claim shapes a public decision, a policy, or a widely held belief. Trivial or private assertions do not enter.

§02

Falsifiability

Can the claim be checked? It must be specific enough that a qualifying source could confirm or contradict it. Values and predictions are not claims of fact.

§03

Reach

How far did it travel? Reach measures the audience the claim actually reached, not the prominence of the speaker. Scale is a reason to look, not a verdict.

§04

Process readiness

Is the case ready to run cleanly? The claim must be attributable to a named party, and the record must be complete enough to engage in good faith.

§04Standardized outcomes

The outcomes are fixed labels, applied by the same standard every time. They describe the claim, not the character of the person who made it.

AS STATED

The claim was substantiated with qualifying sources. The record stands as the subject presented it.

PARTIALLY AS STATED

A material portion was substantiated; another material portion was not, or required qualification the original claim omitted.

SUBSTANTIATION FAILED

No qualifying source supported the claim within the cycle, and none was offered on request. The claim does not meet the standard.

EDUCATIONAL RESPONSE

The claim rested on a common misunderstanding rather than a factual assertion. The record is corrected without a verdict against the subject.

Every outcome rests on the same question: can the claim be verified?

The Evidence Standard