Editorial policy

How articles on this site are written, checked, funded and corrected. Last updated 24 September 2026.

1. Who writes the articles

Every article is written and signed by a named person. At present that person is Margaret Ward, who also serves as the director of publication and is responsible for everything published here under Czech law. Anonymous or pseudonymous articles are not published.

Articles carry a publication date and a last-reviewed date. Where an article concerns a product whose pricing or features change, the last-reviewed date tells you how stale the description may be.

2. How we establish facts

We separate three kinds of statement and treat them differently.

• Mechanism — how a technology works. These are verifiable from primary documentation, and we cite it.
• Measurement — test results, benchmark figures, market share. We only report these with a named source and a date, linked so that you can read the original. If we cannot identify the round and the methodology, we do not publish the number.
• Product specifics — prices, plan tiers, device limits, feature availability. These change frequently. We deliberately avoid reproducing them and direct readers to the vendor instead.

3. Where a vendor and this site disagree

The vendor’s own current information prevails. If a description on this site differs from the seller’s product page, checkout page or terms of sale, the seller’s version is the one that binds you and ours is simply out of date or wrong. Nothing on this site forms part of a contract between you and any seller.

4. How the site is funded

Entirely by affiliate commission. There is no display advertising, no sponsored content and no paid placement of any product. Commercial links are labelled “partner link” at the point of the click, carry rel="sponsored nofollow" in the markup, and are accompanied by a note stating that we are paid and that the reader is not charged more. The full arrangement is described in the advertising disclosure.

5. What the editorial team refuses to do

These are commitments, not aspirations. If you find us breaking one, it is a correction we owe you.

• No fabricated testimonials. We do not invent reader stories, quote imaginary customers, or present marketing copy as a first-person account. An earlier version of this site was branded “Reader Stories” and described its article as reader-submitted. It was not. That framing has been removed.
• No invented ratings. We publish no star ratings, no scores out of ten and no “editor’s choice” badges. We have not tested these products in a laboratory, so a score from us would be decoration pretending to be measurement.
• No artificial urgency. No countdown clocks, no “offer ends tonight”, no false scarcity, no “only 3 licences left”.
• No guaranteed outcomes. No security product makes anyone safe. We will not write that one does.
• No unverifiable superlatives. “Best”, “number one”, “award-winning” and “top-rated” do not appear unless attached to a named award or test, with a date and a link.
• No impersonation. We do not imitate the branding of the products we write about, and we do not present ourselves as an official channel, a news organisation or a government body.
• No fake scarcity of information. The whole article is on the page. Nothing is withheld behind a click.

6. Independence from advertisers

No advertiser, affiliate network or vendor sees an article before it is published. None has any right of review, approval or veto, and none has ever asked for one. Commission rates play no part in what we choose to write about or what we conclude.

Commission is earned on a click-through and subsequent purchase. It is not conditional on the article being favourable, and no arrangement we have makes payment contingent on the tone of our coverage.

We will also say plainly what this independence does not cover: we earn more when readers buy than when they do not. That is a structural incentive and no policy removes it. The counterweights we apply are the refusals in section 5, the requirement to cite primary sources in section 2, and the fact that every commercial link on the site is labelled as one.

7. Corrections

We correct errors rather than deleting them quietly.

1. Write to info@sorentis.online with the page, the statement you think is wrong, and — if you have one — a source.
2. We aim to acknowledge within five working days.
3. If the claim is wrong, we correct it and add a dated line to the corrections section of that article saying what it previously said and why it changed.
4. If we cannot substantiate a claim but cannot disprove it either, we remove it. The burden sits with us, not with the reader.
5. If we disagree with you, we will tell you why.

Corrections already made to the main article on this site are listed openly in its corrections section.

8. Illustrations

All diagrams on this site are original SVG files drawn for the article they appear in. We do not publish product screenshots, vendor logos or stock photography, and no image on this site is intended to suggest an official relationship with any brand. Every diagram has a text description embedded for screen readers and a caption explaining what it shows.