Governance and trust

The current editorial and operating team remains responsible for receiving public corrections because Solar Standard Institute is still being built and neither it nor an independent governance body currently holds that authority. A correction should identify the page or decision, the challenged statement, the supporting source or reasoning, and any urgency or potential harm.

Submissions are reviewed centrally today. That is an operating fact, not an independence claim. Material corrections should change the affected page, preserve the reason for the change, and update connected claims where necessary.

• Named responsibility for privacy, safety, finances, content, review, and incident response.
• Conflicts and funding relationships that affected a decision are visible.
• Material claims can be challenged and corrected.
• Contributors have a response and appeal path for consequential records.
• Access and authority can be suspended when risk or abuse appears.
• A continuity plan lets another qualified person maintain or wind down the work.

• Money may fund Objectives, access, review, tools, translation, or operations.
• Money does not buy favorable findings, worker data, private access, votes, standards exceptions, or review outcomes.
• Productive commercial work should follow its agreed compensation terms without making the funder the final judge of a contributor's overall capability.
• Material funder influence must be disclosed even when no formal vote changes hands.

The response should fit the problem: correct a page, narrow a claim, pause a tool, remove access, change leadership, transfer an Objective, partner with a better institution, or close the affected work. The smallest responsible repair should come before dramatic institutional theater.