Last updated: 26 October 2026
How TechnoBabu decides what to publish, who writes it, how guides are sourced and labelled, and how we keep advertising away from editorial decisions. This page exists because trust has to be earned — so here is exactly how the site works.
Who writes TechnoBabu
Articles are written and edited by Anurag Sinha, who has spent years building websites, running home servers on everything from a Raspberry Pi to retired office desktops, configuring VPNs, and automating routine tasks. A note records where a guide’s prices and versions came from. Other guides are documentation-led: written from vendor documentation, standards and manuals, with every source linked so you can check a claim rather than taking our word for it. We do not treat another blog as a primary source, and when a topic needs expertise we don’t have, we say so and point you to a more authoritative source rather than bluffing.
The owner writes and reviews the articles and may use AI tools to help edit the wording. Editing assistance is not a substitute for checking facts, sources and technical instructions. There are no anonymous staff writers and no outsourced contributors. One named person is accountable for every article on this site, which is the point: if a guide is wrong, you know exactly who got it wrong and where to write.
Evidence labels and testing
No guide here is presented as a bench test unless it carries a test note, and we would rather tell you which is which than blur the two. The site uses two labels. An About the prices and versions note records where a guide’s prices, plans or software versions were checked and what was checked; it does not claim that any command was executed. A Tested note is reserved for a documented hands-on test, and it is added only when retained, dated evidence of that test exists. A guide without a dated note is documentation-led: its commands and configuration come from the official documentation linked in its Sources section, not from a run we are claiming but did not make.
In the current published inventory, 3 posts carry a Tested note, 16 carry an About the prices and versions note, and 35 are documentation-led. If a test note is added later, it must state the conditions and the limitations — the city, the ISPs, the line speed, the software versions — so you can judge how far the result travels, and one measurement from one home connection will be presented as exactly that, never as a national verdict. Apart from the measured results in the tested guide, latency and speed ranges in the guides are typical figures, not results we measured. If we can’t test something, the article says so plainly instead of pretending.
A guide without a Tested note does not present events, setups or results as the author’s own experience. Examples in those guides are written as examples, not as stories of something that happened to us.
Publish dates are the dates guides went live on this site. TechnoBabu launched on 26 September 2026, so no guide carries an earlier date. When a guide changes, its updated date changes; its publish date does not move.
How a guide is built
The process is deliberately boring, because boring is what produces guides that still work in six months.
- Pick a real problem. Usually a reader question, or a gap where existing advice assumes conditions that do not hold in India.
- Read the primary documentation first. Vendor docs, the RFC, the manual page, the regulator’s own notice — before any other article on the subject.
- Label what was and wasn’t run. A guide only gets a test note when it was built on real hardware or a rented server and the dated evidence of that run is retained, failures included. Otherwise it is published as documentation-led.
- Write it in order. Assuming no prior knowledge at step one, and never skipping the step that is obvious to us but not to a beginner.
- Check claims against sources where applicable and link them, then review prices, versions and commands without implying that an untested item was executed.
- Review for safety and honesty. Does it warn where it should? Does it claim only tests that have retained, dated evidence? Does it overstate what the reader gets?
Sourcing and accuracy
Technical claims are checked against official documentation, and we link to primary sources — vendor docs, RFCs, regulator notices — rather than asking you to take our word for it. When a guide touches on regulation (such as India’s CERT-In directions affecting VPN providers), we describe our lay understanding and link the source, and we flag clearly that it is not legal advice.
We prefer sources in this order: the project’s or vendor’s own documentation; the underlying standard or specification; the manual pages and release notes for the exact version; the regulator or statutory body for anything legal; and reputable independent measurement where the first four cannot answer the question. Another blog is not a source. If the only support for a claim is that everyone repeats it, we either verify it ourselves or leave it out.
Every article ends with a Sources section listing what it relies on. If you cannot trace a factual claim in a guide back to something in that list, that is a defect — report it.
Safety and responsible disclosure
Guides are reviewed for the harm a reader could do by following them. Destructive commands carry warnings and backup advice. Anything involving mains electricity or high-load switching states plainly that fixed wiring needs a qualified, licensed electrician. Services are bound to localhost or placed behind authentication by default rather than published to the internet in step one.
We also draw a hard line on purpose. Privacy, blocking, VPN and networking guides are written for protecting your own systems and data. We do not publish instructions for getting into systems you do not own, bypassing paywalls, logins or licence checks, or circumventing a service’s access controls — and where a technique could read that way, the article says explicitly that it is not for that.
Recommendations
When we recommend a product, host or service, the recommendation rests on our own use, on publicly verifiable facts, or on the official documentation we link — and the article makes clear which of those it is. No vendor can pay to be recommended, to have criticism removed, or to see an article before publication.
There are no affiliate links anywhere on this site, so no recommendation earns us a commission. We also say when the honest answer is “none of these”, or “the free option is fine”, or “don’t buy this yet” — conclusions that affiliate-funded reviews are structurally reluctant to reach.
Advertising separation
If ads appear on this site, they are served through Google AdSense and chosen by Google’s systems, not by us. Advertisers have no influence on what we write. If we ever publish sponsored content, it will be labelled “Sponsored” at the top of the article — no exceptions.
We carry no manually placed ad units, which is an editorial decision as much as a technical one: we do not insert ads into command blocks or disguise them as download buttons or navigation. Google Auto Ads can choose placements automatically, so those placements still require review on desktop and mobile. We never ask readers to click ads, and we do not write about a topic because its ads pay better.
Corrections and updates
When a reader reports an error and the report reaches the owner, it can be checked, corrected and dated. Report errors through support@technobabu.com.
How we handle it depends on what is wrong. A factual error — a wrong command, price or figure — is fixed and the update dated. A material error that changed the article’s advice is fixed with a note saying what it previously said. A stale version or price is refreshed and the dated note updated. A broken link is repointed at the current documentation, or replaced. And if a guide is wrong in a way that cannot be patched, we would rather withdraw it than leave it misleading people.
We do not quietly edit away mistakes that readers have already acted on. Correcting an article is not an admission we mind making; publishing something wrong and leaving it is the part we would mind.
Comments and moderation
Comments are held for moderation before publication. Corrections raised in comments should be treated exactly like corrections by email when they are received.
What we will not publish
- Guest posts, paid links, link exchanges or pre-written vendor articles, in any form.
- A review of something we have neither used nor properly documented.
- Rewritten versions of other people’s articles, or content padded to hit a word count.
- A claim of testing that did not happen, or a price we did not check.
- Anything written primarily for a search engine rather than for the person reading it.
Editorial accountability
Every guide is published under one named editor and carries a dated evidence label where a price/version check, or a documented test with retained evidence, exists. The 1/17/36 inventory describes tested, price/version and documentation-led guides; it is not an authorship label, and only the guide with a Tested note is presented as a hands-on test.
A dated test note, a price, a benchmark or a citation must be supported by the source or retained evidence it names. The publication method is not evidence on its own: readers should use the Sources section and the stated evidence label to assess a guide.
The publication schedule remains limited by source checking, correction review and keeping the labels accurate. If the evidence model changes, this policy will say so.
Questions about this policy
If anything here is unclear, or you think the site is falling short of it, write to support@technobabu.com.