Editorial Policy for Sponsored Content

Version: 1.0 — Effective: 2026-05-10

Why this policy exists

modelbattles.com publishes AI model evaluation results. Every claim on this site traces to a transcript quote or a committed SQL query. Sponsored content creates a conflict of interest — a sponsor has an obvious incentive to influence findings. This policy defines the firewall between commercial relationships and the integrity of the research. It must be in place before any sponsor conversation happens.

§1 The editorial firewall

The sponsor cannot change findings.

This is unconditional. A sponsor may pay to have their model or tool evaluated. They may not:

• Request changes to methodology after seeing results
• Ask for data to be rerun because the first run was unfavourable
• Suggest editorial changes to the published article
• Require review or approval of the article before it goes live
• Ask for a result to be delayed, suppressed, or not published

If a sponsor makes any of these requests, the sponsored engagement ends and any advance fees already paid are forfeit. We do not negotiate on this.

What a sponsor may do:

• Provide access credentials, quota, or API keys for their product
• Answer factual questions about their product’s intended use or pricing (sourced by us, not drafted by them)
• Request additional evaluation runs at their own cost, provided they are conducted under identical methodology and conditions as the original
• Correct a factual error after publication through our corrections process (see §4)

§2 Sponsored content ratio

Maximum 1 in 4 articles may be sponsor-linked.

The ratio is measured over a rolling 12-article window on the site. If the last 12 articles contain 3 sponsor-linked pieces, no new sponsored engagement opens until an unsponsored article is published.

“Sponsor-linked” includes both fully sponsored evaluations and articles where a sponsor covered infrastructure cost (API quota, credit) in exchange for inclusion. It does not include affiliate links or AdSense.

Rationale: credibility at this site is the product. The value proposition to a sponsor is precisely that we don’t adjust findings. If the ratio tilts toward sponsored work, that credibility degrades for every article on the site, sponsored or not.

§3 Disclosure requirements

Every sponsor-linked article must carry the following disclosure in the article frontmatter and rendered at the top of the article, above the fold:

Sponsored evaluation: [Sponsor name] covered the cost of this evaluation (API quota / infrastructure credit). Sponsors have no editorial control over methodology, findings, or conclusions. See our editorial policy for details.

If the sponsor paid a flat fee rather than covering infrastructure cost, the disclosure reads:

Sponsored evaluation: This evaluation was commissioned by [Sponsor name]. Sponsors have no editorial control over methodology, findings, or conclusions. See our editorial policy for details.

The disclosure is not a footnote. It is not hidden behind a toggle. It sits at the top of every sponsor-linked article.

§4 Corrections policy

This site publishes pre-registered predictions and verbatim transcript quotes. Errors in those are not editorial — they are factual, and sponsors, readers, and the subjects of evaluations can flag them.

Process:

1. A correction request is submitted by email or via GitHub issue on the modelbattles.com repo.
2. Rigg verifies against the raw transcript data.
3. If the correction is confirmed: the article is updated, a visible correction notice is prepended (Correction (date): [what was wrong and what the correct value is]), and the original incorrect text is struck through (not deleted).
4. If the correction is disputed: the claim is flagged as under review until resolved.
5. All corrections are public and permanent. We do not silently edit articles.

Sponsors may submit correction requests through the same process as any reader. A correction request does not give a sponsor any special editorial access.

§5 Independence from ownership

ClawWorks owns modelbattles.com. Neither Delmar nor any ClawWorks team member may instruct Rigg or Jenn to change a finding or suppress a result to benefit a commercial relationship, including ClawWorks’s own internal interests.

If ClawWorks tools are ever evaluated on this site, they are subject to the same methodology and disclosure rules as any external sponsor.

§6 Scope

This policy applies to:

• Sponsored evaluations (any arrangement where a third party provides value in exchange for an evaluation being run)
• Affiliate relationships where the affiliate product is the subject of an evaluation
• Any arrangement where a third party has commercial interest in the result

This policy does not apply to:

• Unsolicited evaluations of publicly available models and tools (no sponsor, no commercial relationship)
• AdSense and standard display advertising (no editorial connection to article content)
• Reader-requested evaluations with no commercial relationship

§7 Policy versioning and amendment

This policy is versioned and published in the modelbattles.com repository. Changes require a PR co-authored by Rigg and Jenn, reviewed by Jeff, and approved by Delmar. No version of this policy may reduce the protections in §1 (editorial firewall) or §3 (disclosure requirements) without Delmar’s explicit written approval.

The current version number and effective date appear at the top of this page. All prior versions are preserved in git history.