Boldpost
Login

How to Build a Canon

A Canon is your group’s curated, annotated reference list — organized by trust level and grounded in your stated epistemic commitments.

Boldpost’s neutrality principle

Boldpost does not choose which canons are more aligned with applicability, truth, or reality. Owners of canons set their own standards and provide their own evidence, based on their purpose. As a rule, canons will vary across disciplines because of differing needs and focus. Within any discipline, those that most closely align with relevance, truth, and reality tend to rise to the top and gain respect because of greater applicability, usefulness, and simplicity.

Core design principles

1. Explicit epistemic stance
State your group’s premises, and what “trustworthy” means regarding applicability and reliability of references within the context of your work.
2. Tiered source categories
Use the three tiers built into Boldpost — Endorsed, Cautionary, Rejected — and explain what each tier means for your group’s efforts. “Cautionary” to an astronomy club means something different than “Cautionary” to a government statistics office.
3. Transparent evaluation criteria
Spell out your methodology: What editorial standards matter to you? What counts as sufficient evidence? What conflicts of interest concern you? Groups that explain how they evaluate sources earn more credibility than groups that just list outcomes.
4. Contextual notes
A source can be relevant and trustworthy in one domain and irrelevant or unreliable in another. Different domains have different lenses for truth, uncertainty, and argumentation. For example, a lawyer will tend to interpret scientific evidence through a lens of legal standards (adversarial, burden-based). A scientist will tend to use a scientific lens (probabilistic, cumulative). Canon effect: Legal communities canonize precedent and testimony; scientific communities canonize replication and peer review.
5. Self-awareness

Acknowledge how your pursuit and focus shape your canon. Transparency about perspective is not a weakness — it helps readers calibrate.

For example, a legal group focused on constitutional interpretation will prioritize case law, precedent, judicial opinions, and statutory text for its canon. Readers see why empirical social-science studies may be interesting but not dispositive for constitutional arguments.

A journalist team focused on political accountability will prioritize interviews, leaked documents, firsthand reporting, and public records. Readers will understand why the team favors narrative evidence over technical statistical models.

A history department might focus on long-term historic patterns. It will prioritize archival documents, primary sources, and historiography for its canon. Readers will see why real-time intelligence or classified data isn’t part of the historian’s evidentiary universe.

Setting up your Canon

  1. Create a Boldpost group for your department or organization.
  2. Invite your team as admins.
  3. Open your group and click “Create Canon.”
  4. Write your epistemic stance — be specific about what “trustworthy” means to you, what methods or standards you use, and what biases readers should know about.
  5. Add entries — start with your 5–10 most important sources, with rationale for each.
  6. Return and expand your canon over time as you evaluate more sources.

Browse example canons

These example canons cover a range of epistemic approaches — from peer-review-anchored academic departments to community advocacy groups to heterodox inquiry collectives.

NOTE: These are AI-generated examples. AI can make many misjudgments. Many people will disagree with the evaluations in these examples of what is categorized as Endorsed, Cautionary, or Rejected. Please read these as examples on how a group might have chosen to set up its canon. Boldpost enables you to create your own canon and categorizations with your best efforts at categorizing properly.

Academic Information Sciences Canon

Information Sciences / Library Studies

A peer-review-first guide to sources in information and library science.

Civic Reference Canon

Civic & Public Information

A community information literacy guide anchored in public trust.

Greenvale Ecological Canon

Ecology / Environmental Advocacy

We speak for the watershed. Sources evaluated for ecological rigor and conservation commitment.

Open Questions Canon

Epistemology / Creative Inquiry / All Domains

Knowledge is messier than the rulebooks suggest. Come think at the edges.

The Saltmarsh Canon

Community Advocacy / Local History & Policy

Sources that center Saltmarsh community voices, history, and lived experience.

Trades & Technical Standards Canon

Skilled Trades / Technical Standards

Safety-first sources for skilled trades and technical work.

Ready to build your Canon? Sign in to get started.