in Editing
Reject all changes and get your book back
An edit you can undo in one keystroke is an edit you can actually argue with. That is the whole principle.
Every edit we deliver arrives as tracked changes under its own reviewer name, and it passes a mechanical test before it goes out: reject all changes, and the file reproduces the author's text exactly. Not nearly. Exactly.
Why that matters more than it sounds
Editing is a transfer of trust. The author hands over something that took years, and gets back a file that is longer, cleaner, differently punctuated and full of changes they did not make. If the only way to check the work is to read every line against a copy of the original, most authors will not check it. They will accept the lot, or reject the lot, and both of those are failures.
Reversibility removes the fear. If every single change can be undone in one keystroke, then looking at each one stops being a risk and becomes a choice. The author can accept the comma, refuse the cut, and keep the sentence they were attached to without feeling they have wrecked the edit.
What we keep separate
Corrections, suggestions and rewrites go in as distinct passes under distinct reviewer names, so nobody has to guess whether a change is a typo fix or an opinion. Anything that alters meaning rather than mechanics is a comment first.
The last hand is the author's
We ask every author to go through new or rewritten passages and put them into their own words before the book is finalised. It is the best guard there is against a book reading as though it were assembled rather than written, and it is what keeps the pages theirs.