EITHER.SO Editorial Policy and Publishing Standards

EITHER.SO publishes a page only when it serves a distinct reader need, shows meaningful original effort, labels evidence and uncertainty, and passes editorial review.

Helpful purpose comes first

Each page must satisfy a distinct visitor need. We do not publish location, keyword, or product permutations that repeat the same page with small substitutions.

Before a page can enter the index

Editorial release checklist

Guide release standard

An evergreen guide must provide a substantial rendered answer, a direct answer, a distinct heading outline, a decision rule, a five-step worksheet, a clearly hypothetical example, common failure modes, an edge-case section, and a relevant next action. Every core teaching section must contain at least two developed paragraphs that explain both the idea and how to apply it. Depth checks are a release floor, not a reason to add filler. A page that does not completely answer its reader task stays out of the library.

Hub and spoke structure

Every guide belongs to one of six decision topics. The decision guide library connects each topic hub to every spoke, and each guide links to related methods and the tool that performs the next useful action. The decision-making glossary defines technical terms without creating a separate thin page for every definition.

Evidence and attribution

Factual claims that can change should be verified against primary or authoritative sources. We distinguish known facts, estimates, user inputs, and editorial judgment. We do not fabricate research, tests, purchases, interviews, credentials, or quotations.

Examples and experience claims

Worked examples are labeled hypothetical. They demonstrate a method and are not presented as customers, case studies, or observed results. We do not claim to have bought, tested, surveyed, or interviewed unless the work occurred and can be documented.

AI and automation

Automation can help organize drafts, create original visuals, check consistency, and import approved articles. It is not permission to publish at scale without review. Imported articles must pass identity, topic-fit, useful-structure, outbound-link, heading, and near-duplicate checks. Accepted articles are spaced at least three days apart. Articles that are off-topic, promotional, tracked-link heavy, or missing a method, evidence, limitations, or a practical next action are rejected before scheduling.

Third-party content

We do not rent folders, publish white-label commercial sections, or host unrelated material to borrow this domain's search visibility. A contributor or imported article must serve the same decision-making purpose, follow the same design and quality standards, and remain under EITHER.SO editorial control. User poll votes do not create indexable profile or result pages.

Comparisons and commercial relationships

A future affiliate or sponsored relationship will be disclosed near the affected comparison and its links will use the appropriate sponsorship attribute. Payment cannot buy a score, winner, or editorial claim. Tools must perform the promised task independently of advertisements.

Navigation and advertising safety

We do not insert deceptive pages into browser history, interfere with the back button, disguise advertisements as tool controls, or redirect a promised result to an advertisement. Any future advertising library must pass this check before release.

Corrections

Send the URL, disputed statement, and supporting source to editor@either.so. We review material errors, correct them promptly, and do not change dates merely to make old content look fresh.

Visual policy

Launch visuals and the logo are original AI-generated assets directed for EITHER.SO, simplified for editorial clarity, reviewed for relevance, and served as optimized WebP files. Decorative images do not stand in for evidence.