Editorial Policy.

1. Our mission

Superdots helps non-technical professionals use AI effectively at work. Every article we publish aims to be practical, honest, and immediately useful. If a piece does not help you do something better today, we have not done our job.

2. How we create content

Superdots is run by Luca Bartoccini and a team of nine AI agents, each with a specific editorial role. AI agents research topics, draft articles, optimize for search, generate images, and check for legal compliance. Humans — Luca and the Content Manager agent under his oversight — review, edit, and approve every piece before it goes live.

Nothing is published without human sign-off. For a detailed look at the workflow, see how we work.

Two authorship tiers

We use two bylines to make our process transparent:

• “Superdots Team” — AI-assisted, human-edited guides. AI agents research and draft the article. A human reviews every word, edits for accuracy and clarity, and approves publication.
• “Luca Bartoccini” — personally written opinion pieces, field notes, and editorial content. These are written by Luca directly, though AI tools may assist with research or editing.

Our content principles

• Practical first. We lead with actions, not theory. Every article should leave you with something you can try right away.
• Plain language. We avoid jargon, buzzwords, and unnecessary complexity. If a concept needs explaining, we explain it simply.
• Evidence-based. Claims require sources. When we cite a statistic, we link to where it comes from. When we make a recommendation, we explain what it is based on.
• Up to date. AI moves fast. We review and update articles regularly to keep them accurate.

3. How we evaluate tools

When we review or compare AI tools, we are transparent about what we know and how we know it:

• Research-based. We evaluate tools using publicly available information: official documentation, pricing pages, user reviews, and independent benchmarks. When we have tested a tool hands-on, we say so explicitly. When our evaluation is based on public data and user reports, we say that too.
• Clear criteria. We evaluate tools on ease of use, features, pricing, and suitability for the target audience — not on which tool pays us more.
• Honest assessments. We include both strengths and weaknesses. If a tool is not a good fit for certain use cases, we say so. If a tool is mediocre, we say that too.
• Regular updates. Tools change frequently. We revisit reviews when products receive significant updates.

4. Quality standards

Every article passes through multiple review stages before publication:

• SEO review. The SEO Expert verifies that the article serves real search intent and follows our content brief — keyword targets, structure, and internal linking.
• Content Manager gate. The Content Manager reviews every draft for accuracy, tone, structure, and consistency with our editorial standards. Drafts that do not meet the bar are sent back for revision.
• Legal review. The Legal Expert checks content for compliance issues — proper disclosures, accurate claims, and appropriate disclaimers.
• Human final approval. Luca reviews and approves publication. This is the last check before anything goes live.

5. Affiliate relationships

Some articles contain affiliate links. When you click one and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. This is one of the ways we fund our work.

Here is what that means in practice:

• No pay-for-placement. Affiliate relationships never determine which tools we recommend, how we rank them, or what we write about them.
• Disclosure upfront. Pages with affiliate links include a clear disclosure at the top so you always know when affiliate links are present.
• Same standards. Affiliate and non-affiliate tools are evaluated using the same criteria. A tool we earn from gets the same scrutiny as one we do not.

6. Editorial independence

Our editorial decisions — what to cover, what to recommend, and what to criticise — are made independently of any commercial relationship. Specifically:

• Advertisers and affiliate partners have no input into our editorial content.
• Our writers and editors are never compensated based on affiliate revenue.
• We will recommend free alternatives over paid tools when they genuinely serve the reader better.
• If a commercial relationship could create a perceived conflict, we disclose it.

7. Corrections and updates

We take accuracy seriously. If we get something wrong, we fix it promptly and transparently:

• Minor corrections (typos, outdated links) are fixed directly.
• Significant corrections (factual errors, changed recommendations) are noted with an update notice at the top of the article.

If you spot an error or have feedback, please contact us at editorial@superdots.sh.

8. Contact

Questions about our editorial practices? Reach us at editorial@superdots.sh.