Claim vs Proof

“We increased conversion,” “I led the project,” and “the team delivered on time” are claims.

They may be true, but they are not proof.

A product screenshot does not automatically prove conversion increased. A testimonial does not automatically prove on-time delivery.

Claim — what is being asserted?

Evidence Type — what kind of proof best supports it?

Source — where does the evidence come from?

Context — what are the scope, timeframe, baseline, and role?

Verification — how can someone check it?

Output claims need artifacts. Outcome claims need metrics or observable change. Capability claims need project history or transferable proof.

Analytics, client testimony, repositories, decision logs, reports, and public records give evidence an origin.

Metrics without baseline, timeframe, or scope can mislead. Artifacts without role clarity can overstate contribution.

Public links, timestamps, third-party references, signed documents, release records, and independently checkable sources all strengthen proof.

Small claims may need only an artifact. Large claims about impact, revenue, scale, or leadership require stronger, layered evidence.

Forwork can connect every claim to Evidence Type, Source, Context, Contributor, Date, and Verification Status.

This helps both people and AI distinguish self-asserted claims from verifiable proof.

Do not only ask, “Does this claim sound persuasive?”

Ask: “If someone doubts this claim, what can they actually inspect?”

Claim → Evidence Type → Source → Context → Verification.