Not sure whether a route is useful, too vague, or missing the trade-offs that matter? Use this page to tell the editorial team what needs to change.
What to include in your note
- The page or route you were reading.
- What decision felt unclear.
- Which variable was underexplained: cost, access, limits, timing, or risk.
- Whether the brand evidence was enough to support the route.
- Any reader safety concern you noticed.
What helps most
Short, specific feedback is easier to act on than general praise or criticism. If a comparison felt one-sided, say which detail was missing. If a checklist did not match the route, point to the item that felt out of place.
How we use feedback
We read feedback as an editorial signal, not as a promise of response time or action. It helps us tighten route logic, remove weak assumptions, and make the trade-offs clearer for readers in Australia.
Before you send it
- Did you name the page?
- Did you explain the decision point?
- Did you point to the exact line or section?
- Did you note whether the issue was clarity, safety, or evidence?
If your note is about a broader policy issue, use the relevant policy page instead. If it is about a specific route, keep the feedback tied to that route and the evidence shown on it.