Public accountability hub
Trust should be inspectable.Do not take the badge on faith.
This is the map to RealReviews verification, review weight, contributor compensation, commercial relationships, business disputes, moderation, corrections, methodology changes, and public reporting.
The trust architecture
Verification
Identity, experience, transaction, evidence, outcome, and follow-up labels remain separate.
Review weight
Evidence changes confidence. Positivity, advertising, and conversion do not.
Contributor compensation
When compensation is offered, the public label explains who funded it and what payment depended on.
Commercial independence
Businesses can buy tools and services—not scores, verdicts, suppression, or organic placement.
Business participation
Businesses can respond, provide evidence, identify factual errors, and show corrective action.
Corrections and history
Material corrections, new evidence, methodology changes, and status changes remain traceable.
Policies you can open now
| Question | Public record |
|---|---|
| How is a contribution verified and weighted? | Verification and Review Weight |
| Can a company pay for a better result? | No Pay-to-Play |
| How can a contributor be compensated? | Earn for Honest Reviews |
| How does the full evidence system work? | How RealReviews Works |
| What must a responsible brand agree to? | Open Feedback Standard |
| How are ratings and rankings handled today? | Ratings and Rankings Methodology |
| How can a factual error be fixed? | Corrections |
| How are review and source labels governed? | Review Guidelines and Source Labels |
Live statistics require a denominator
RealReviews intends to publish counts such as submitted reviews, identity and transaction verification rates, unverified contributions excluded from scoring, compensated-outcome distribution, manipulation removals, disputes, corrections, score changes, and suspended standards.
Those figures will appear only when the underlying event is measured consistently and the denominator is named. A percentage without its eligible population can create confidence it does not deserve. Until a metric meets that test, this center will describe the rule instead of displaying a decorative number.
Escalation paths
Correct a factual error
Use the corrections path for an inaccurate name, date, address, service claim, source attribution, or other checkable statement.
Respond as a business
Claim the profile or use the business response path to submit a public response and supporting evidence.
Report abuse or influence
Report manipulation, undisclosed commercial pressure, sentiment-tied payment, impersonation, or another trust concern.
Challenge methodology
Identify the affected rule, version, and evidence. Methodology criticism is evaluated separately from a request for a preferred result.
Version history matters
Methods change as the platform gains better evidence, detects new manipulation patterns, or learns that a rule creates an unintended incentive. A material change should name its effective date and explain what changed.
A methodology update does not silently rewrite the historical record. Profiles should show the version used for a score or conclusion, and meaningful score changes should state whether new evidence, a correction, or a new method caused the movement.