# Stop the bleeding, then ask for it back: what changed in v1.3.0, sgit.ai

> The changes to the article "Stop the bleeding, then ask for it back" in v1.3.0, paragraph by paragraph.

*Source: <https://newsroom.sgit.ai/articles/versions/stop-the-bleeding-then-ask-for-it-back/v1.3.0.html> · sgit.ai v0.7.87 · this file is generated from the same content as the page, so the two cannot drift. Every page on this site has a `.md` twin; internal links below point at them.*

---

[Home](../../../index.md) / [Articles](../../index.md) / [Stop the bleeding, then ask for it back](../../stop-the-bleeding-then-ask-for-it-back.md) / [Versions](../stop-the-bleeding-then-ask-for-it-back.md) / v1.3.0

# Stop the bleeding, then ask for it back: what changed in v1.3.0

From v1.2.0 (2026-10-16, `62d7d61bb`) to v1.3.0 (2026-10-18, this release), paragraph by paragraph.

0 paragraphs added, 0 removed, 1 changed in place, 62 unchanged. About 2 words added and 0 removed. Insertions are marked like this, deletions like this; unchanged runs are folded to one line; figures appear as their file names.

[← v1.2.0](v1.2.0.md) · [all versions](../stop-the-bleeding-then-ask-for-it-back.md)

37 unchanged paragraphs, under In short {#in-short}, The subscriptions we keep {#keep}, Step one: ask them what we used, and work it out ourselves {#ask}…

That includes the companies that refund and the companies that do not. I wantwould like to give real kudos to the companies that do it, because they are not obliged to, and that deserves to be said loudly. And I wantwould like to have the data on the companies that say no. The subscriptions site has already worked out how to publish that safely, and I would follow its rules exactly: record, never verdict, with no adjectives anywhere; the reply quoted with the person's details removed; silence recorded as a row, not a blank; "we do not hold that" recorded neutrally; never publish a first refusal, only one given after a second ask; and the good path published as prominently as the bad. A dated row that says "asked on this date, answered on that date, refunded three months" is the kudos. A dated row that says "asked twice, no reply as at this date" needs no adjective. The register publishes a company's behaviour, never a person's case.

25 unchanged paragraphs, under A service for helpers {#helper}, Done by agents, under a policy {#agents}, What this does not claim {#limits}…

[← v1.2.0](v1.2.0.md) · [all versions](../stop-the-bleeding-then-ask-for-it-back.md)


---

*[Site index for agents](../../../llms.txt) · [HTML version](https://newsroom.sgit.ai/articles/versions/stop-the-bleeding-then-ask-for-it-back/v1.3.0.html)*
