Skip to content
ROLearn Intelligence
Subscribe
Accountability

Corrections

Every error we have found or been told about, what it was, and when it was fixed.

Last updated

The policy

We correct in public and we do not delete. When a published claim turns out to be wrong, the piece is updated and a dated entry is appended to it saying what was wrong and what it now says. The entry stays there permanently. Nothing is quietly rewritten, because a number that can change without a trace is a number nobody should cite.

Three kinds of change get logged:

  • Correction: a fact, figure, or chart was wrong.
  • Clarification: the claim was defensible but ambiguous, and was rewritten to say what was meant.
  • Update: new information changed the picture, and the piece now reflects it.

Where an error is material (it changes a headline finding), the correction is also noted at the top of the piece and the piece is re-sent to newsletter subscribers who received the original.

How to report an error

Email [email protected] with the URL and what you believe is wrong. If you have the counter-evidence, send it. We aim to respond within two business days and to publish or reject the correction within five.

Reporting an error costs you nothing and gets you credited by name if you want to be. We would rather be corrected by a reader than quoted incorrectly by a stranger.

The log

  1. The First 14 Days of a Virtual-World Launch: What Teams Can Actually Know

    Replaced the scaffold edition, which used invented activation points and an unsupported 68% statistic. This edition contains no campaign-performance dataset and makes no predictive claim.

  2. Virtual-World Activation Measurement Readiness Index 2026

    Replaced the illustrative category rankings and sample scores shipped with the site scaffold. The report now presents a sourced ROLearn measurement-readiness framework and contains no campaign-performance dataset.

  3. What Drives Prices in Player Markets

    Replaced the scaffold edition, which referred to an undisclosed illustrative sample and unsupported rankings of pricing signals. This edition makes no empirical ranking claim.