Most spiritual content tells you what to believe and never tells you where it got it. This library's whole method is the opposite: show the provenance, teach the practice properly first, and let you decide. These are the rules that produces.
§ 02
The ten rules
01Teach the practice fully, first. Part I of every page teaches the thing generously and at real depth before a word of critique. Somebody who has never held a pendulum properly cannot evaluate an argument about pendulums.
02Verify before naming. Every date, author, study, figure and legal case is checked against a source before it appears. Where our own reference material turned out to be wrong, the page carries the correction, not the original claim.
03Never invent an attribution. If we cannot source it, it does not appear — and where the omission is conspicuous, the provenance section says what was left out and why.
04Report real people with care. Allegations are described as allegations, with the forum and the outcome named, and denials included. Where somebody has died, we report it precisely or not at all.
05Steelman properly. The fair case is written by somebody trying to make it convincing. A page that cannot state the best version of the thing it examines has not understood it.
06Say what the page is not saying. Every critique opens by naming the misreading it expects, because the commonest failure of a critique is being heard as an attack on the reader.
07Safety is always visible. Never behind a click, never below a fold, never inside a filter. Filters on this site dim; they never hide — you always see what you are excluding.
08Interactives reveal, never assess. Nothing here scores you, types you, or tells you what is wrong with you. The moment a tool starts producing verdicts about people it becomes the kind of authority this library warns you about.
09Correct in public. Errors are fixed on the page and logged in the version history, not quietly deleted.
10Nothing is sold, and nothing is gated. No ads, no affiliate links, no sponsored content. Books are pointed at, never sold, and always with the same line: we are not vouching for these, only pointing at them.
§ 04
Corrections we have already made
Rule 02 is the one most easily claimed and least often kept, so here are cases where our own drafting material was wrong and the published page differs from it.
✓Curse-removal fraud figures. Our source described one victim losing over $17 million. The court record shows $17.8 million as the total documented loss across all victims, with the best-known victim able to document roughly $12 million — and the court declined to rely on her testimony about more. The page carries the corrected version.
✓“Golden shadow.” Attributed to Jung in our material. The idea is his; the phrase is a later post-Jungian coinage. The page says so.
✓Cycle and cognition. Our material said hormones affect “mood, energy and cognition.” A 2025 meta-analysis of 102 studies found no systematic evidence of cognitive change across the cycle. Mood and symptoms hold; cognition does not, and the page now says which is which.
✓Cultural concepts of distress. Our material named mal de ojo as a DSM-5 glossary entry. It is not one. The page uses maladi moun, which is.
✓An unverifiable claim about a named person's death appeared in drafting material for the manifestation page. We could not source it and it was left out — and the provenance section records the omission so it is visible rather than silent.
✓A page shipped under the wrong heading. What Is Magic, Really? carried the hero of a different page. Correct title, correct body, wrong visible heading. Found during a full index sweep and fixed.
§ 05
Where we are out of our depth
Several pages describe living traditions and clinical territory this author is not the right person to have the last word on. Those pages say so on their face rather than hoping nobody notices — including the pages on Hoodoo, on closed Indigenous practice, on chakras and karma, and the clinical sections of the plant medicine and mental-health material.
A library that applies a standard to everybody else and not to itself is not applying a standard.
If you hold one of these traditions, or work clinically in one of these areas, and something here is wrong — we would rather hear it than not. Corrections are made on the page.