The Charitology 100

The method lab is open

Build a complete nomination packet with an activity, mechanism, moral lenses, depth rationale, source evidence, additional-funding limits, affected-community agency, conflicts and the strongest objection. Save several packets locally, edit them, undo deletion and export or restore a validated backup.

The public rating gate

A ranked list can steer attention and money. The website does not publish one before independent public red-team review. A complete packet is ready for discussion, not an approved recommendation. No browser checklist can stand in for that review.

Questions the review must settle

Every lens and depth level deserves a fair hearing. Evidence and uncertainty must remain visible. Reviewers must address additional funding, harms, conflicts, agency, appeals and correction procedures. They must also decide whether a ranked list is justified at all when values and outcome units differ.

Nomination and method lab

Prepare a source-linked nomination and challenge the criteria. This tool does not rank, endorse or approve organizations. The public rating gate remains closed until independent red-team review. A complete packet is ready for discussion, not a recommendation.

Public activity or research titleWho or what is being considered?Depth describedUnclassified or disputed0 · Relief1 · Repair2 · Prevention3 · Structure4 · SourceMultiple levels; explain belowMechanism and why that description fitsRelevant moral lenses and disagreementsEvidence, dates, outcome units and public HTTPS sourcesAdditional funding: use, limits and unknownsAffected communities: agency, consent and missing voicesStrongest objection and what would change the claimConflicts of interest, including none known or unknown

Save nominationStart another

Download nomination packetsExport JSON backupPreview backup import

What public review must decide

1. Whether any list should be ranked at all, given disagreement across values and outcome units.
2. What evidence supports activity-level depth labels and how dissent is preserved.
3. How funding limits, harms, agency, conflicts and excluded alternatives change a recommendation.
4. Who can review, appeal or withdraw an entry, and how corrections reach people who relied on it.

Challenge the method in public. Public submission is a separate, deliberate action through GitHub; this browser form sends nothing.