How this works

We read podcast transcripts and pull out forward-looking, falsifiable claims. The quote you see is a verbatim excerpt of the transcript — we never edit it. If we can't align an extracted quote to the exact words in the transcript, we drop it.

Past-tense statements, vague aspirations, opinions with no checkable outcome, hypotheticals, jokes, and sponsor reads are excluded. So are claims that can only be settled with private data (a company's internal numbers) and pre-announced calendar dates that aren't really forecasts.

A claim only appears on a person's record when the words are their own. When a host is reading the news or relaying what someone else said, we attribute the claim to the show, never the person — and it is never scored on anyone's track record. Names come from a small, hand-verified whitelist to avoid misattributing a misspelled or mis-heard name.

Every published claim is tiered. Tier A has a resolution date and a mechanical criterion. Tier B is checkable but softer. Tier Cis a real prediction that's too hedged or long-horizon to score — we show it, but it never affects a record. Win–loss records count tier A and B only.

A prediction is only put on a track record if it clears two gates. First, timing: it needs a stated deadline within about 18 months of when it was made. Open-ended calls (“eventually,” “in twenty years”) and predictions with no date we can pin down are shown as tier C — on the record, but not scored — because a forecast that can't settle in a reasonable window isn't a fair thing to grade. Once a prediction resolves, it counts regardless of how far out its deadline was.

Second, determination: an independent observer has to be able to later mark it clearly right or wrong from public evidence. Claims that turn on a matter of degree (“does well,” “focuses on”), a vague aggregate (“most countries,” “many CEOs”), private data we'd never see, or a summary that reaches past what was actually said are shown as tier C rather than scored. If a call can't be settled cleanly, it doesn't belong on a win–loss record.

Each claim carries a resolution criterion — the observable event that settles it. Those criteria are our editorial judgment and are disputable. When a claim resolves we mark it correct, incorrect, or a push, with a source. If you think we got a criterion or a verdict wrong, tell us on the corrections page.

This is not gotcha journalism. Being wrong about the future is normal and expected — the point is a fair, transparent, verbatim record, not a scoreboard of shame. We publish open predictions and settled ones alike.