Trust and credit

Review and quality

How Betabace decides what is ready to publish and what remains uncertain.

These docs explain the product in plain language. Binding contributor, privacy, payment and other legal terms control if there is a conflict.

Review matches the risk

Not every field needs the same process. A typo can publish quickly; a new precise location for an access-sensitive boulder deserves careful local review.

Useful review signals

Technical checks for model completeness, scale and file integrity.
Independent agreement from climbers who know the route.
Local knowledge for access, naming and historical claims.
Clear source evidence for corrections and contested facts.
Transparent uncertainty when reliable evidence is unavailable.

Consensus is not always truth

Grades and names may genuinely vary. Betabace can show distributions, aliases and unresolved history rather than forcing false certainty into one field.

Review should make uncertainty visible—not hide it behind an official-looking answer.