<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>VerifyHub on carney.wiki</title><link>https://carney.wiki/tags/verifyhub/</link><description>Recent content in VerifyHub on carney.wiki</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://carney.wiki/tags/verifyhub/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>I Audited My Own Website. It Scored 24 Out of 50.</title><link>https://carney.wiki/blog/i-audited-my-own-website-24-out-of-50/</link><pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://carney.wiki/blog/i-audited-my-own-website-24-out-of-50/</guid><description>My website scored 24 out of 50.
That is a bad score. It is also exactly the kind of result people find easier to explain away than fix.
I had explanations. The site had grown over years. Hugo generated much of the metadata. Older pages followed older patterns. The first crawl stopped before it reached the whole sitemap.
All true. None of it made the site better.
I built VerifyHub to look at a website the way a skeptical buyer, search system, or AI assistant might: not as a collection of attractive pages, but as a body of claims that should be understandable, supported, and easy to inspect.</description></item></channel></rss>