GachaGetting things right matters to us, and we always do our best to keep information current, up-to-date, and accurate.
GachaMeister publishes reviews, guides, data and other information that collectors may use when deciding where to spend money, which services to use and what to trust. That means when we get something wrong, we have a responsibility to correct it properly.
It’s also a big part of why we make a point of distinguishing between an actual error, information that has simply changed since publication, and a disagreement with one of our conclusions - because we understand how important it is to gain and keep our readers’ trust.
On this page, we explain how we handle all three, as well as showing you how companies, platforms, marketplaces, grading services, sellers and other people or organisations we cover can respond to something we have published about them.
Think We've Got Something Wrong?
If you find what you believe is an error on GachaMeister, please let us know through our Contact page.
Where possible, include:
- the URL of the page;
- the specific statement, figure, or section that you believe to be incorrect;
- what you believe the correct information should be; and
- any evidence or source supporting the correction.
You don't need to work for the company or person in question to let us know we’ve made an error. If a reader spots, for example, a wrong pack-opening fee, a link that no longer works, a problem with one of our calculator tools, or anything else that looks incorrect, we want to know about it.
Now, we won’t just change something automatically because someone lets us know they believe something to be incorrect. We will, however, investigate each correction request on a case-by-case basis, look at the evidence, and decide whether the published information needs to be corrected, updated, or left as it is.
How We Handle Corrections
Not every mistake has the same action. Internally, GachaMeister uses four correction levels: C0 to C3. This ensures that something simple - a formatting mistake, for example - isn’t treated the same way as an error that could change the entire conclusion of a review. The four levels are laid out below:
| Level | What It Means |
|---|---|
| C0 - Presentation-Only | A spelling, formatting, layout, broken-link, or similar type of problem that doesn’t change the general meaning of the content. |
| C1 - Minor Factual Correction | A factual mistake that should be fixed but does not materially affect the piece’s overall meaning, conclusion, or decision a reader might make. |
| C2 - Material Factual/Economic Correction | A meaningful error involving something like a price, fee, calculation, evidence point, score, comparison, recommendation, or conclusion. These corrections require visible accountability rather than being silently changed. |
| C3 - High-Risk Correction | An issue involving serious legal, safety, or reputational implications. Any C3 items receive additional internal review before we decide how the affected material should be handled. |
The bigger the error, the more important it is that readers can understand what changed.
How We Inform Readers of Corrections
If we make a material correction, we don’t just want to simply replace the old wording and pretend it never happened.
The affected information should be corrected, and the material change should be made visible so readers can understand that the original version contained an error - and what was subsequently changed.
Where applicable, we also preserve the evidence and changelog history needed, so that readers and platforms can understand why the correction was made. Please note that this is subject to legitimate privacy, legal, and evidence-handling restrictions.
You can read more about how we handle sources and preserve evidence in our Evidence & Verification Policy.
Corrections vs Updates
Sometimes, information changes without the original information ever having been wrong. A platform might, for example, change its fees, a marketplace might add a new withdrawal method, or a grading company might change its turnaround times (or pricing structures - we’re looking at you PSA!)
Similarly, a new service may be introduced or an older one retired - and this can outdate our reviews quite quickly if we’re not made aware of the change(s).
If our original information was accurate for the date and evidence we were reporting, and we later change it to match what a platform now offers, that is treated simply as an update, not a correction.
We try to make that difference clear, because when we rewrite something that was historically accurate, but the new information makes it look like the situation had always existed - that can be just as confusing or misleading.
Where we show a “last updated” date on a GachaMeister page, it should reflect a meaningful review or update rather than a cosmetic edit.
What Happens When a Company Disagrees With Us?
Companies and people we cover are welcome to challenge anything we publish about them, at any time - and we truly mean that. If anybody believes GachaMeister has made an incorrect statement, we welcome them to reach out to us, and show us why.
If they believe a factual statement is wrong, we want them to show us why, and we’ll then consider the evidence in the same way we would evidence supplied by anyone else. If it shows that we made a mistake, we’ll correct the error. If it provides relevant new information, we may update or “qualify” what we’ve already written.
What’s important, however, is that a disagreement does not automatically mean that our original content was wrong, or inaccurate. A company may well disagree with our review of their product/service, be unhappy with a review score, object to our criticism, or feel we placed too much weight on something that happened during our testing - and while we’ll consider those as factors, the simple fact that a complaint or correction request was submitted doesn’t mean that GachaMeister content automatically gets updated or rewritten.
Right of Reply
There are some situations where fairness requires more than waiting for somebody to contact us after publication, and in cases where we’re preparing to publish serious, negative coverage - like a listing in GachaMeister’s Black Binder, for example - we may give a company, platform, seller, service, or individual a chance to respond before we publish our piece.
This is particularly important where the proposed coverage involves serious allegations or conclusions that could materially affect somebody's reputation.
The purpose is to give the organisation/subject in question a chance to:
- correct factual information;
- provide evidence we may not have seen;
- explain relevant context;
- challenge our interpretation of the evidence; or
- set out their own position.
Their response then becomes another piece of information we need to review. Most importantly, a right of reply is not a right of approval, and external companies do not get to choose how we write our conclusions, approve our editorial pieces before publication, or dictate the specific scores we award.
If a platform or individual chooses not to reply, we also don’t treat that silence as evidence that an allegation is true; we just try to be as fair as possible and give everyone a fair chance to respond.
Commercial Relationships Don't Affect Corrections
Whether GachaMeister has a commercial relationship with a company has absolutely zero impact on whether something should/will be corrected or not.
A company or individual cannot pay or otherwise incentivise us to remove a supported finding, prevent a correction, avoid a correction, change the evidence standard for their product/service, or receive different treatment simply because our relationship with them generates revenue.
Likewise, a company does not need to be a commercial partner for us to correct something we got wrong. GachaMeister’s Editorial Independence Policy explains this separation in more detail.
Getting in Touch with GachaMeister
Our corrections process is there to handle GachaMeister's own editorial content, and it’s not there as a customer support channel for the companies we cover. It is also not currently a dispute-resolution or arbitration service between collectors and platforms, marketplaces, sellers, or other businesses.
If your issue is with something GachaMeister itself has published, however, we absolutely want to hear about it.
Use our Contact page to send us the relevant URL, explain what you think is wrong and, where possible, include the evidence you believe supports the correction.