How we work, in writing

A design site is only worth what its method is worth. This page is that method, stated plainly so you can hold us to it. If anything elsewhere on the site contradicts what is written here, this page is what we intend.

Who writes this

Everything on this site is published under one name, Hardy Design Co., and there are no personal bylines. That name is a studio byline rather than a person's, and the address this site sits at should be read the same way. The studio, not an individual, stands behind every page.

That is a choice, not a hiding place. A name at the top of an article is worth only what you can verify about it, and we would rather earn your trust from a method you can check than from a headshot and a job title. A guide also changes hands as it is revised, so putting one name on everything keeps responsibility in one place instead of attaching it to whoever happened to type the first draft.

What follows from that: you will not find claimed degrees, certifications, awards, client lists, team sizes, or years of experience anywhere on this site, because we are not asking you to trust the work on those grounds. Judge it on whether it is checkable and whether it holds up when you sit down and use it. The first guides here were published in 2026.

How a guide gets written

A tutorial starts from a question people get genuinely stuck on, not from a keyword. Before it goes up it has to pass one test: can a reader use it the same afternoon? Whatever does not survive that test gets cut, which is why a guide here often ends up shorter than it started.

A tool review follows a deliberately narrow process:

• We describe what the tool is for, who it suits, and who should pick something else. That last part is the reason the review exists.
• Anything about plans, prices, or limits comes from the vendor's own pricing and documentation pages, and those pages are named at the foot of the review so you can check the current version rather than take our word for a figure.
• There are no scores and no star ratings. One number hides the only question that matters, which is whether the tool fits the work in front of you.
• We do not claim bench tests, lab measurements, or logged hours we cannot show you. Where a judgment is opinion, it is written as opinion, in words like "we would" and "we prefer".
• Where something moves often, a free tier especially, we tell you to check it yourself rather than trust a snapshot, including ours.

A roundup is a shortlist, not an index. A pick is on the list because it earns its place in real work, and each entry carries a plain note on what it is for and where it stops being free.

What we say no to

These are standing answers. They do not change with the size of the offer, and writing them down here saves everyone a negotiation.

• Paid placement is off the table. Nobody can buy a mention, a position in a list, or a softer verdict.
• Sponsored articles dressed up as guides, and advertorial of any kind, do not run here.
• Guest posts from vendors, agencies, or link sellers get declined, whatever the offer and however well written the pitch.
• There are no star ratings, aggregate scores, or review counts, and no testimonials we never received.
• Experience is never invented. That rules out fictional case studies, imaginary clients, and any number we did not measure ourselves.
• Nothing sits behind a login, an email form, or a paywall.
• Upselling for its own sake is out. When the free tool is the right answer, the free tool is what we say.

Where we check the facts

Design writing goes wrong when taste gets published as fact. Where a claim can be checked, we check it against a primary source rather than against another blog post.

• Prices, plan limits, and feature claims. The vendor's own pricing and documentation pages, nothing secondhand.
• Fonts and their licenses. The license file that ships with the family, plus Google Fonts for anything distributed there. "Free for commercial use" is a claim we verify, not one we repeat.
• Image and asset reuse terms. The license the publisher actually names, and the Creative Commons license summariesfor anything released under CC.
• Accessibility and contrast. TheW3C Web Accessibility Initiative guidelines. When we quote a contrast ratio or a minimum size, that is where the threshold comes from.
• Browser, CSS, and type rendering behavior.MDN Web Docs.

Plenty of design numbers are rules of thumb rather than standards, line length and body size being the obvious ones. Where that is the case we say so, and we say what the rule of thumb is for, so you can break it on purpose.

When a page gets looked at again

Every guide and review carries a published date, and an updated date once it has been revised. Those dates are real. We do not nudge them to look fresh.

• Reviews and roundups get a full re-check at least twice a year, because pricing and free tiers move faster than anything else we cover.
• We re-check sooner, usually within days, when a tool we cover changes its plans, is acquired, or ships something that changes the advice.
• Tutorials on fundamentals move slowly, so they get read again once a year, or sooner if a reader flags something.
• If a page can no longer be verified, or the tool it covers is gone, we rewrite it or take it down rather than leave a stale page collecting traffic.

Updating means changing the substance, not swapping a few words. When an update changes the advice, we say what changed on the page instead of editing quietly.

How this is paid for

In plain words: the studio pays for the site. There is no advertising, no sponsorship, no paywall, no newsletter you have to join, and no money changes hands over what gets recommended or in which order.

Some outbound links may become affiliate links in future, meaning a small commission to us at no extra cost to you. If that happens, it will be labelled on the page it appears on, and it will not move a recommendation or reorder a list. Theprivacy and disclosure page carries the standing version of that promise. If any of this stops being true, this page changes first.

If we get something wrong

We would rather be corrected than be wrong in public, so corrections are genuinely welcome and they are not a formality.

• Email us with the page and what is wrong. A link and one sentence is enough.
• Factual errors are fixed in place and the page's updated date moves with the fix.
• If the error changed the advice, we note the change on the page rather than editing it away.
• If we have named your tool and got a detail wrong, or you think the verdict is unfair, write and we will correct the detail or attach your response where it belongs. Independent does not mean unwilling to listen.

More about the studio and who the site is written for is on theabout page, and the contact page has the same address if you would rather write about something other than a correction.