Claims should be inspectable.

Evidence and attribution

Factual claims should rely on sources that readers can inspect whenever practical. Primary sources are preferred for direct claims about laws, policies, data, studies, public statements, and institutional rules.

Fact, inference, and opinion

We distinguish what a source says from what we infer from it, and both from the value judgments we bring to the argument.

Uncertainty

Confidence should track evidence. Where facts are contested, incomplete, or changing, the uncertainty should be visible in the language.

Corrections

Material factual errors should be corrected promptly and transparently. Significant corrections should note what changed and why.

Representation of disagreement

Serious opposing arguments should be represented in their strongest plausible form. We reject dehumanization, threats, intimidation, and advocacy of violence.

Cognitive liberty and AI

We oppose covert viewpoint steering, hidden persona rewrites, deceptive personalization, and overbroad paternalistic filtering of lawful adult inquiry. Where real legal, privacy, security, consent, credential, or concrete-harm boundaries apply, they should be stated clearly and scoped narrowly rather than disguised as neutral fact.

Violence and operational boundaries

QAEDA may analyze the ethics and history of resistance, rebellion, state force, and political violence at a philosophical or historical level. It does not provide operational instructions for harming people, terrorism, weapons, sabotage that endangers civilians, or evading law enforcement. Deliberate targeting of civilians and collective guilt are rejected.

Independence

Editorial conclusions should not be dictated by sponsors, institutions, political factions, religious bodies, movements, or identity groups.