The Standard
Who we build for.
We take work on two things: the merit of the craft, and the character of what it serves. We decline work that fails this Standard regardless of the fee. The Standard judges what a project does in the world — not a client's private beliefs, party, or faith.
The seven Articles
Honest by design · red line
The product works without deceiving the people it reaches. No deceptive practices, no bait-and-switch, no manufactured confusion, no fine print written to be missed.
No harm as the business model · red line
The thing doesn't make its money from addiction, predation, surveillance-for-sale, or extraction from the vulnerable — predatory lending, engineered compulsion, scams dressed as opportunity.
Truthful speech · red line
What we publish for you is true. We won't build a site to launder a lie, inflate a claim you can't stand behind, or give a fraud a respectable face.
The dignity of the person
The work treats customers, workers, and users as ends, not marks. Nothing that dehumanizes a group or trades in contempt.
The freely-given, respected
We honor privacy and consent. We won't help sell people's data behind their backs, or wall off and meter what was given to the commons freely.
Nonviolence & lawfulness · red line
Nothing that incites harm or breaks the law; no marketing of instruments whose purpose is to injure.
Open dealing
We're transparent with you — what we're building, what it costs, what we won't do — and we ask the same honesty back. A client who deals in bad faith forfeits the work.
How the Standard is applied
The bright lines
Beyond the Articles, some work we decline on its face — no weighing, no conversation, whatever the fee. We do not create:
- Sexually explicit content.
- Content that promotes or centers recreational intoxicants — alcohol, tobacco, vaping, cannabis, or other recreational drugs.
These are categorical, not red-line Articles to be scored. The bar is content that markets, promotes, or is built around these — an incidental mention inside otherwise honest work isn't the target.
How we decide
A person judges, not a rubric. John Fromel makes the call. The screener and the Articles keep the judgment consistent and shown — they don't replace it.
At any stage. We can decline at the first email or partway in. If we find mid-build that a project fails the Standard, we stop, and we say why.
Red lines vs. grey. A "no" on a red-line Article (I, II, III, VI) is disqualifying. The rest are weighed; two or more soft failures mean we talk it through before we commit.
The graceful no
When we decline, we say so plainly and privately — no public shaming, no lecture. Where we honestly can, we point you toward someone who can help. A "no" here is about the fit between your work and this Standard, not a verdict on you.
Revocability
The Standard doesn't end at launch. If a project we built or host drops below it afterward — starts deceiving, starts harming — we can withdraw the work: take down hosting, pull any mark of ours it carries, on reasonable notice. What we put our hands to, we stay answerable for.
Heat 261030·F7F0
Casting record
- 30 October 2026261030·F7F0Changed since the record was made.
- 13 September 2026260913·EB29First cast.