Telling good sources from bad ones
- Author
- CRYPTO PORT Editorial
- Published
- Updated
- Reading time
- 6 min
In short
Judging information by its content alone is hard. Checking who published it, when, and from what position at least changes how you weigh it. This page recommends no source or asset, and checking prevents no losses.
Key points
- For facts about rules or operators, go to the regulator or the operator's own material
- Check the update date — rules and fees change, so old explanations become wrong
- Look for disclosure of interests and of any referral compensation
- Material containing confident forecasts cannot be verified, whatever it cites
Definition
Deciding how much weight to give information based on where it came from, when it was updated and who published it.
For factual matters — rules, tax, whether an operator is registered — the destination is clear: the Financial Services Agency, the National Tax Agency, the operator's own site. Explanatory articles help you understand, but the evidence you rely on should come from the primary source. Fees, supported assets, withdrawal terms and verification requirements change often, and secondary write-ups routinely disagree with current conditions.
Getting into the habit of checking the update date pays off. In this field both the rules and operators' terms keep moving, so an explanation that was accurate a few years ago can be wrong now. An article with no date, or a post you cannot place in time, is reason enough for extra caution. How correct the text sounds tells you nothing about how old it is.
Check the author's position too. If they are compensated for referrals, is that stated? Who wrote it, with what background, and who is accountable? Having an interest is unremarkable; whether it is disclosed is what changes the weight. You are not obliged to treat undisclosed material the same as disclosed material.
Finally, anything containing a confident forecast of prices or markets cannot be verified at all. However elaborate the analysis, the result is only knowable afterwards, and where a record of correct calls is displayed you generally cannot see how many wrong ones were not. This site says nothing about future prices either. Vetting sources will not prevent losses, but it does reduce how often you decide on a false premise.
Watch out for
- · This is not investment advice and recommends no source, asset or service
- · Vetting sources does not prevent losses
- · For final confirmation on rules and tax, use FSA and NTA materials and consult a professional
Frequently asked questions
If several sources say the same thing, is it right?
If they all draw on the same original, more of them verifies nothing. What matters is whether each checked the primary source independently. Agreement alone is not evidence of accuracy.