BET Index Methodology

The Baldwinson Ethical Technologies (BET) Index evaluates providers using two principles: (1) present-day policies and conduct and (2) an "institutional memory" model that does not forgive unresolved harm.

Scope

What We Rank

The BET Index (Infrastructure Edition) evaluates Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) and major hosting providers, including hyperscalers and independent infrastructure vendors.

Included examples: AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, IBM Cloud, Oracle Cloud, Hetzner, OVHcloud, DigitalOcean, Vultr, etc.

What We Do Not Rank (In This Edition)

Consumer ecosystem clouds (e.g., iCloud) are not directly comparable to IaaS/PaaS providers. These may be covered in a separate BET Consumer Cloud Index.

Philosophy

Most "inclusion" indices measure policy checkboxes and forget history on schedule. BET is built on two premises:

  • Inclusion without worker dignity is performative.
  • Institutions must carry moral memory until harm is repaired.
    Offenses do not "fade" simply because time passes or leadership changes.

Outputs

For each provider, BET publishes:

  • Base Category Scores (0–100) across five pillars
  • Ethical Ledger (Event Log) with sources
  • Moral Inertia Adjustments (growth while unresolved; decay only after remediation)
  • Final Score (0–100) and rank
  • Historical Moral Record (Non-Scoring, Permanent) for major historical complicity events

Pillars and Weights

BET uses five pillars. Weights can vary by edition; the recommended default is:

Pillar Weight
Leadership & Political Integrity 35%
Worker Dignity & Labor Record 35%
Policy & Benefits 10%
ERG Depth & Transparency 10%
External Advocacy 10%

Rationale: Leadership and labor reflect what cannot be faked. Policies and ERGs matter, but are secondary.

Pillar Definitions and Scoring

Each pillar is scored 0–100 before Moral Inertia adjustments.

1. Leadership & Political Integrity (35%)

What leaders do and endorse publicly, including political activity, governance posture, and moral direction set at the top.

Scoring Inputs

  • Executive public statements and policy positions (CEO/Board/Top leadership)
  • Political donations and lobbying patterns (where verifiable)
  • Consistency over time (not one-off press releases)
  • Governance actions (DEI rollbacks, censorship, retaliation against speech)

Scoring Guide (Illustrative)

  • 90–100: Consistent pro-rights alignment; transparency; no major contradictions
  • 70–89: Mostly aligned but mixed signals; partial transparency
  • 40–69: Repeated contradictions; donations/lobbying misaligned with stated values
  • 0–39: Severe contradictions; support for anti-rights agendas; repeated integrity failures

2. Worker Dignity & Labor Record (35%)

How workers are treated in practice, including labor relations, retaliation, safety, pay fairness, and lived experience.

Scoring Inputs

  • Safety track record and credible injury reporting
  • Anti-retaliation posture; treatment of organizers/whistleblowers
  • Contractor and supplier labor standards (where relevant)
  • Regulatory actions, lawsuits, settlements (weighted by credibility and severity)
  • Accessibility and accommodation practices (including for trans and disabled workers)

Scoring Guide

  • 90–100: Strong safety record + worker protections; credible oversight
  • 70–89: Generally acceptable with limited concerns
  • 40–69: Recurring labor disputes, safety concerns, retaliation allegations
  • 0–39: Systemic harm patterns, major controversies, repeated violations

3. Policy & Benefits (10%)

Measures written commitments and formally provided benefits that reduce discrimination and enable equitable participation, independent of enforcement quality.

Scoring Inputs

  • Explicit non-discrimination policies covering sexual orientation, gender identity, and expression
  • Inclusive healthcare benefits, including partner parity and transgender healthcare where legal
  • Family formation and parental benefits evaluated through an access and non-discrimination lens
  • Recognition of domestic partners or non-traditional dependents where applicable
  • Public clarity and specificity of benefits documentation

This pillar evaluates written commitments and benefits availability only; enforcement and lived experience are assessed elsewhere.

4. ERG Depth & Transparency (10%)

Whether internal representative structures exist (when organizational scale permits) and meaningfully function, including their independence and influence.

Scoring Inputs

  • Existence of LGBTQ+ employee resource groups
  • Scale, geographic reach, and leadership sponsorship of ERGs
  • Structural independence of ERGs from corporate communications or HR
  • Evidence that ERGs influence policy, benefits, or workplace protections

ERG-related criteria are evaluated where organizational size and geographic distribution reasonably support representative employee structures (generally organizations with sufficient headcount to sustain independent ERGs).

5. External Advocacy (10%)

Evaluates whether a company’s public actions or material support measurably affect human rights outcomes beyond its own workforce.

Scoring Inputs

  • Documented public positions opposing laws or policies that directly restrict LGBTQ+ rights, where such positions are taken
  • Financial or in-kind support for human rights organizations, evaluated for transparency and consistency (where applicable)
  • Participation in industry coalitions or standards bodies addressing discrimination or civil rights impacts
  • For infrastructure providers: policies or actions addressing misuse of technology for mass surveillance, repression, or authoritarian control

Base Score Calculation

Compute the Base Score as:

Base Score = Σ (pillar_score × pillar_weight)

Example (with default weights):

Base = 0.35×Leadership + 0.35×Labor + 0.10×Policy + 0.10×ERG + 0.10×Advocacy

Ethical Ledger: Events and Evidence

BET maintains a public Ethical Ledger of documented events for each provider.

What Qualifies as a Ledger Event

An event must meet at least one:

  • Regulatory action, court filing, settlement, or official investigation
  • Multiple credible independent journalistic sources
  • Credible NGO reports
  • Verified company documents / statements
  • Consistent pattern corroborated across sources

Event Record Fields

  • Provider name
  • Event start date
  • Category (leadership, labor, policy, advocacy, etc.)
  • Severity level
  • Description
  • Sources (links)
  • Status: ongoing / remediated
  • Remediation date (if remediated)
  • Notes on verification

Severity Model (Penalty Points)

BET assigns a severity points value (0–100 scale points) per event:

Severity Points
Minor 5
Moderate 15
Severe 25
Egregious 40

Severity is determined by: scale of harm, intent vs negligence, repetition/pattern, official findings vs allegations, and number of affected people.

Moral Inertia Module

This is the core differentiator: events do not decay until remediated.

Key Principle

Time does not forgive unresolved harm.
Penalties either grow (if unremediated) or decay (only after remediation).

Parameters (Published Each Edition)

  • Grace window: 0.25–0.5 years (investigation window before growth begins)
  • Annual growth rate (g): typically 10–20% depending on category
  • Penalty cap multiplier: typically 3× (can vary by severity)
  • Post-remediation half-life: typically 10–12 years (slow forgiveness)
  • Mitigation factor (m): 0–1, applied at remediation (partial fixes)

Penalty While Unresolved (Growth)

For an event i:

  • severity points = P
  • time since start (years) = t
  • grace window = w
  • annual growth rate = g
  • cap multiplier = C

Unremediated penalty:

If t ≤ w: penalty = P

If t > w: penalty = min( P × (1+g)(t−w), P × C )

Meaning: the longer a company delays fixing the issue, the more it hurts.

Penalty After Remediation (Decay)

If remediation occurs at time R, we compute the penalty at remediation, apply mitigation, then decay.

  • half-life (years) = H
  • λ = ln(2)/H
  • time since remediation = u

Remediated penalty:

penalty_at_fix = min( P × (1+g)(R−w), P×C )

post_fix_base = penalty_at_fix × m

penalty_now = post_fix_base × e(−λu)

Meaning: penalties only fade after a verified fix—and even then, slowly.

Final Score Calculation

Final Score = Base Score − Σ (current penalties from ledger events)

Final score is bounded to [0, 100].

Remediation Standards

An event is marked remediated only if there is evidence of durable correction.

Acceptable Remediation Evidence

  • Independent third-party audit
  • Regulator confirms compliance improvements
  • Policy change + enforcement + monitoring data
  • Worker restitution or structural reform (where applicable)

Non-Remediation Examples (Insufficient)

  • PR statements without structural change
  • Leadership swap with no policy change
  • "We're investigating" without results
  • Internal memo without measurable outcomes

Partial remediation is allowed via mitigation factor m (e.g., m=0.7).

Anti-Gaming Rules

To prevent "CEO swap" or PR games:

  • No decay without remediation.
  • Penalty growth continues until fix is verified.
  • Remediation requires external evidence.
  • Repeat offenses stack and can escalate severity.
  • Pattern multiplier: repeated similar offenses in a rolling window may amplify penalty.

Historical Moral Record

BET publishes a separate permanent record for severe historical complicity events.

These entries:

  • Do not affect present numeric scores
  • Do not decay
  • Exist to prevent historical erasure
  • May become scoring-relevant if denial, glorification, or repeat patterns emerge

Transparency and Governance

Right of Reply

Before publication, providers may submit:

  • Corrections
  • Remediation documentation
  • Context and evidence

BET publishes accepted corrections and disputes with rationale for inclusion/exclusion.

Conflicts of Interest

BET discloses funding sources (if any), any relationships with rated companies, and advisory board affiliations.

Versioning

Each release is versioned with: Methodology vX.Y, Ledger snapshot date, and weight changes explicitly documented.