What this does and does not guarantee

Two layers. Machine facts: green. Human judgments: amber. Confusing them is how systems like this lie; we refuse to.

What the record proves

• The poster signed this commitment — these amounts, this cap, this search text — before the first link went out.
• Each forward and each first view happened in the recorded order, hash-chained so history cannot be quietly rewritten.
• The payout arithmetic follows the declared scheme exactly; the payee lines can never exceed the cap. Anyone can recompute every line from the bundle and our public key, offline, without trusting our database.

What the record does not prove

• That a claim deserved acceptance. The poster decides, and the record marks that decision as a human judgment, not a proof.
• That the chain reflects true social causation. A link's parent is who minted it, not necessarily who convinced whom; people hear things three ways at once.
• That payees are distinct people, beyond the identity evidence the poster recorded. Identity checking happens where money does, and its strength is declared per search, not assumed.
• That the poster will pay. We hold no funds and cannot force payment. What you get is a signed, public record that they promised and whether they attested to paying — which is exactly the evidence a claim against them needs.

Where we are the weak point

For people who never made an account, our signature is a witness statement. A dishonest operator could witness falsely — once. Every record is appended to a hash chain whose roots are published and given to posters, so a falsified past requires a fork the world can catch. Our key lives at a public URL; key rotation procedure and verifier ship with the record. If you find a discrepancy the verifier doesn't name, that is a finding — tell us and we'll publish it.