Editorial policy
How Bitcoin Plaster handles sources, accuracy, claim support, updates, and corrections.
Editorial Accountability
Contact & Corrections
Bitcoin Plaster publishes in a topic where mistakes carry weight. A misstated monetary fact, an unclear point about volatility, a stale wallet detail, or an overconfident product claim can change how a reader handles real money. A site that asks readers to trust its judgment has to make its own mistakes easy to report.
The route is one inbox:
It is reviewed deliberately rather than continuously. Useful corrections are taken seriously, even when a message does not receive an individual reply. This is the shared correction path for Bitcoin Plaster and for work published under the pseudonymous bylines of Frederick Staunch, Angela Blake, and Meryl Staunch. It is not an emergency support desk, and the sections below explain what it handles well and what it does not.
What to send
A useful correction is specific. A report is most useful when it includes the page URL, the section or statement in question, what looks wrong, incomplete, outdated, or unclear, why it matters, and any source worth considering.
None of that is a requirement. A short plain note pointing to a real problem is worth more than a polished correction that never gets sent.
What this inbox is for
This is the right route for factual corrections to published content, whether on money and inflation, the Bitcoin thesis, volatility and holder behavior, or self-custody. It also covers unclear or missing qualifiers, outdated hardware-wallet, recovery, product, or policy details, source and context clarifications, broken links, and editorial messages tied to a published page or author claim.
Some reports get higher priority because a reader may act on them directly: anything touching seed phrase handling, recovery guidance, hardware-wallet setup, a product recommendation, pricing or availability, a firmware or app-flow change, an unsupported first-hand claim, or a statement that could push a reader toward a specific custody action.
Commercial concerns belong here too, including a missing affiliate disclosure, a raw affiliate URL where an internal route should appear, or product coverage that reads as too commission-driven.
What this inbox is not for
This inbox is not the channel for personal financial, investment, tax, legal, or estate-planning advice, urgent wallet or seed phrase recovery, lost-key emergencies, transaction reversals, account or customer support for exchanges or third-party products, sponsored-content pitches, paid link-insertion requests, generic promotion, or requests for any editor to manage, inspect, recover, or take custody of coins.
Bitcoin Plaster is an editorial publication, not a financial-advice service, tax practice, law firm, estate-planning practice, recovery desk, support queue, or product vendor. Frederick Staunch does not manage funds, inspect wallets, request seed phrases, or provide recovery services. Angela Blake does not provide individualized financial, tax, legal, or investment advice. Meryl Staunch provides practical family-preparedness and inheritance-readiness education, not individualized legal or estate-planning advice. None of the three editors asks readers to send wallet secrets, account credentials, or sensitive recovery material.
How reports are handled
A correction does not have to agree with Bitcoin Plaster's framing to be useful. It only has to identify something that may be wrong, incomplete, misleading, stale, or thinly supported.
A valid report may lead the site to revise a sentence, add a qualifier, update a source, clarify a distinction, correct a product detail, remove an unsupported claim, annotate the page, or schedule a deeper review when the issue affects a recommendation-sensitive page. Bitcoin Plaster would rather correct a weak claim than protect a polished paragraph that should not have run.
Not every message receives an individual reply, and there is no promised response time. That is deliberate. A public correction path should be honest about what it is: a way to keep the work accurate and accountable, not a support contract or a live help channel.
The test applied to every message is the same one: does this make the page more accurate, clearer, more honest, or safer for the reader?