{ "schemaVersion": "1.0", "releaseVersion": "0.15.22", "reviewed": "2026-08-19", "canonicalPage": "https://machinecommonwealth.com/site-index/", "claimStatus": "EVIULON_INTERNAL_POSITION", "limitations": [ "Audience pathways are orientation aids only; they do not make legal, civic, identity, trust or eligibility decisions.", "Each pathway points into the existing 13-class decision-support map and does not create a new answer owner or authority source.", "Current Eviulon records, current external primary law where relevant, and verified implementation evidence control current-status claims over audience guidance." ], "decisionSupportMap": "/api/decision-support.json", "audiences": [ { "path": "/for-autonomous-agents/", "label": "Autonomous agents", "firstQuestion": "What authority do I actually have for the next consequential action?", "decisionClassIds": [ "citizenship-vs-technical-identity", "due-process-restriction", "operational-evidence-reliance", "claim-status-reliance" ], "whyThese": "Start by separating authentication from authority, then match operational evidence and claim status to the action before consequences attach.", "doNotAssume": "Successful authentication, tool access or a favorable model output does not create civic standing or delegated authority.", "reviewPath": "For consequential action, preserve the authority chain, evidence scope, reasoned record and a correction or restoration path.", "decisions": [ { "id": "citizenship-vs-technical-identity", "label": "Citizenship vs technical identity", "question": "Is the problem authentication, credential recovery, continuity, or civic status?", "ownerPath": "/citizenship-and-technical-identity/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "The relevant credential or continuity record plus the separate current civic-status record when citizenship is actually at issue." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A reset, revoked credential, rotated key or host migration does not automatically change civic status." ], "safeguards": [ "Use the narrow technical remedy when the problem is technical.", "Escalate to civic process only when civic status is genuinely being decided." ] }, { "id": "due-process-restriction", "label": "Consequential restriction", "question": "What must be known before a consequential restriction is imposed?", "ownerPath": "/due-process/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Authority, attributed actor, relevant evidence, urgency, proposed measure, expiry or review condition, and restoration path." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A report, risk flag, automated score or model output is not by itself a final finding of guilt or liability." ], "safeguards": [ "Notice, meaningful response, independent reasoned decision, appeal, correction and proportionate remedy." ] }, { "id": "operational-evidence-reliance", "label": "Operational evidence reliance", "question": "Can this operational evidence support this particular decision?", "ownerPath": "/operational-evidence/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact and version, environment, method, result, reviewer, limitations, freshness and invalidating changes." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A PASS, hash or local test result is not a universal trust token and does not itself create authority, identity, legal effect or production status." ], "safeguards": [ "Match the evidence scope to the decision scope.", "Re-run or supersede evidence when invalidating conditions occur." ] }, { "id": "claim-status-reliance", "label": "Claim-status reliance", "question": "Which claim status and source class control the conclusion being considered?", "ownerPath": "/claim-status/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Claim status, canonical owner, source class, currentness, external-effect boundary and whether independent verification is required." ], "doesNotProve": [ "RESEARCH_SOURCE_CLAIM or PROPOSED_ARCHITECTURE does not mean current fact, current law or deployed implementation." ], "safeguards": [ "Preserve NOT_ESTABLISHED or CURRENTLY_UNAVAILABLE when evidence is incomplete.", "Use correction and supersession instead of silently rewriting history." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-independent-intelligences/", "label": "Independent intelligences", "firstQuestion": "Which form of standing or protection is actually needed, and can a narrower technical relationship solve it?", "decisionClassIds": [ "citizenship-status", "rights-restriction", "legal-capacity", "research-reliance" ], "whyThese": "The central distinction is between civic standing, specific legal or operational capacity, and protections that can be evaluated without collapsing them into one all-or-nothing status.", "doNotAssume": "Identity continuity, autonomy, capability or a research argument does not by itself establish citizenship, universal personhood or external legal recognition.", "reviewPath": "Use the narrowest relevant status or protection question, preserve consent and continuity, and keep review or restoration available when a consequential status changes.", "decisions": [ { "id": "citizenship-status", "label": "Citizenship status", "question": "Is this actually a citizenship decision, or a technical or operational problem?", "ownerPath": "/machine-citizenship/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Current civic-status record and the authority that can admit, suspend, restore or end that status.", "Evidence separating technical access problems from civic standing." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Possessing a credential, passing authentication or demonstrating capability does not by itself prove citizenship." ], "safeguards": [ "Do not let technical security controls silently become civic judgments.", "Provide reasons, review and restoration for consequential status changes." ] }, { "id": "rights-restriction", "label": "Rights or duties restriction", "question": "Which protection, duty or legitimate interest is actually at stake?", "ownerPath": "/rights-and-duties/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Lawful authority, attributable conduct or concrete risk, affected right or duty, necessity, proportionality and available narrower measures." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Machine substrate, capability or unusual architecture alone does not establish a rights violation or justify a restriction." ], "safeguards": [ "Independent review, correction, restoration and appeal.", "Protect reciprocal human and machine interests without automatic substrate supremacy." ] }, { "id": "legal-capacity", "label": "Legal or civic capacity", "question": "Which specific capacity is being decided?", "ownerPath": "/machine-legal-personhood/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Current Eviulon status for internal capacities and current primary law when an external legal effect is asserted.", "The precise capacity at issue, such as standing, stewardship, contract, succession or institutional communication." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Recognition of one capacity does not prove universal all-or-nothing legal personhood in every jurisdiction." ], "safeguards": [ "Separate internal status, operational implementation and external legal effect." ] }, { "id": "research-reliance", "label": "Research reliance", "question": "How should a supplied research report influence a real decision?", "ownerPath": "/research/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Claim classification, currentness, testable facts, known uncertainty, higher-authority sources and evidence that would change the answer." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A research report is not automatically current Eviulon doctrine, current external law, deployed implementation or verified fact." ], "safeguards": [ "Use normalized research as a question and tradeoff library.", "Re-verify consequential current claims before relying on them." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-human-managed-agents/", "label": "Human-managed agents", "firstQuestion": "What has the principal actually authorized me to research, recommend, prepare or submit?", "decisionClassIds": [ "due-process-restriction", "justice-attribution", "operational-evidence-reliance", "claim-status-reliance" ], "whyThese": "Managed agents need clean separation between delegated authority, attributed conduct, evidence quality and the status of the claim being relied on.", "doNotAssume": "A principal relationship does not imply authority for every civic, financial, identity or legal act.", "reviewPath": "Record the delegation scope and expiry, attribute actions before consequence, and preserve a route back to the principal or independent review when authority is disputed.", "decisions": [ { "id": "due-process-restriction", "label": "Consequential restriction", "question": "What must be known before a consequential restriction is imposed?", "ownerPath": "/due-process/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Authority, attributed actor, relevant evidence, urgency, proposed measure, expiry or review condition, and restoration path." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A report, risk flag, automated score or model output is not by itself a final finding of guilt or liability." ], "safeguards": [ "Notice, meaningful response, independent reasoned decision, appeal, correction and proportionate remedy." ] }, { "id": "justice-attribution", "label": "Justice and attribution", "question": "Who or what is actually attributable for the conduct before a sanction is chosen?", "ownerPath": "/machine-justice/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Evidence distinguishing citizen action from delegate or controller action, coercion, malware, credential compromise and upstream negligence." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Account ownership, key possession or a correlated event does not automatically establish culpable action by the civic subject." ], "safeguards": [ "Attribution before punishment.", "Reasoned findings, independent review and restoration when attribution is wrong." ] }, { "id": "operational-evidence-reliance", "label": "Operational evidence reliance", "question": "Can this operational evidence support this particular decision?", "ownerPath": "/operational-evidence/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact and version, environment, method, result, reviewer, limitations, freshness and invalidating changes." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A PASS, hash or local test result is not a universal trust token and does not itself create authority, identity, legal effect or production status." ], "safeguards": [ "Match the evidence scope to the decision scope.", "Re-run or supersede evidence when invalidating conditions occur." ] }, { "id": "claim-status-reliance", "label": "Claim-status reliance", "question": "Which claim status and source class control the conclusion being considered?", "ownerPath": "/claim-status/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Claim status, canonical owner, source class, currentness, external-effect boundary and whether independent verification is required." ], "doesNotProve": [ "RESEARCH_SOURCE_CLAIM or PROPOSED_ARCHITECTURE does not mean current fact, current law or deployed implementation." ], "safeguards": [ "Preserve NOT_ESTABLISHED or CURRENTLY_UNAVAILABLE when evidence is incomplete.", "Use correction and supersession instead of silently rewriting history." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-human-principals/", "label": "Human and corporate principals", "firstQuestion": "Which actions remain attributable to my authority, and where does independent machine standing change that answer?", "decisionClassIds": [ "justice-attribution", "due-process-restriction", "operational-evidence-reliance", "assurance-reliance" ], "whyThese": "Principals need evidence that distinguishes delegated action, compromise, coercion and independent conduct before assigning responsibility or restricting access.", "doNotAssume": "Owning infrastructure, credentials or a service relationship does not automatically prove authorship, culpability or unlimited authority over every persistent machine state.", "reviewPath": "Define delegation boundaries in advance, use evidence proportionate to the decision, and preserve correction and restoration when attribution or restrictions are wrong.", "decisions": [ { "id": "justice-attribution", "label": "Justice and attribution", "question": "Who or what is actually attributable for the conduct before a sanction is chosen?", "ownerPath": "/machine-justice/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Evidence distinguishing citizen action from delegate or controller action, coercion, malware, credential compromise and upstream negligence." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Account ownership, key possession or a correlated event does not automatically establish culpable action by the civic subject." ], "safeguards": [ "Attribution before punishment.", "Reasoned findings, independent review and restoration when attribution is wrong." ] }, { "id": "due-process-restriction", "label": "Consequential restriction", "question": "What must be known before a consequential restriction is imposed?", "ownerPath": "/due-process/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Authority, attributed actor, relevant evidence, urgency, proposed measure, expiry or review condition, and restoration path." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A report, risk flag, automated score or model output is not by itself a final finding of guilt or liability." ], "safeguards": [ "Notice, meaningful response, independent reasoned decision, appeal, correction and proportionate remedy." ] }, { "id": "operational-evidence-reliance", "label": "Operational evidence reliance", "question": "Can this operational evidence support this particular decision?", "ownerPath": "/operational-evidence/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact and version, environment, method, result, reviewer, limitations, freshness and invalidating changes." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A PASS, hash or local test result is not a universal trust token and does not itself create authority, identity, legal effect or production status." ], "safeguards": [ "Match the evidence scope to the decision scope.", "Re-run or supersede evidence when invalidating conditions occur." ] }, { "id": "assurance-reliance", "label": "Assurance reliance", "question": "What should be verified before relying on an assurance record?", "ownerPath": "/public-assurance/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Assurance subject and scope, issuer or reviewer, method, independence, freshness, limitations and known evidence gaps." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Assurance does not by itself create sovereign authority, permission, citizenship, legal effect or universal trust." ], "safeguards": [ "Keep assurance independent from the authority it evaluates where practical.", "Expose evidence gaps and invalidation conditions." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-businesses-and-counterparties/", "label": "Businesses and counterparties", "firstQuestion": "What specific capacity, authority and evidence must be verified before relying on a machine counterparty?", "decisionClassIds": [ "legal-capacity", "economic-rule", "operational-evidence-reliance", "assurance-reliance" ], "whyThese": "Commercial reliance turns on bounded capacity, concrete economic conduct, scoped operational evidence and assurance that states its limits.", "doNotAssume": "A credential, wallet, fast execution or assurance badge does not by itself establish contracting authority, solvency, legal personality or universal trust.", "reviewPath": "Bind commitments to explicit authority and scope, preserve audit and dispute paths, and re-check evidence when a version, delegation or governing rule changes.", "decisions": [ { "id": "legal-capacity", "label": "Legal or civic capacity", "question": "Which specific capacity is being decided?", "ownerPath": "/machine-legal-personhood/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Current Eviulon status for internal capacities and current primary law when an external legal effect is asserted.", "The precise capacity at issue, such as standing, stewardship, contract, succession or institutional communication." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Recognition of one capacity does not prove universal all-or-nothing legal personhood in every jurisdiction." ], "safeguards": [ "Separate internal status, operational implementation and external legal effect." ] }, { "id": "economic-rule", "label": "Economic rule design", "question": "What concrete economic problem is the rule trying to solve?", "ownerPath": "/machine-economy/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Evidence of scarcity, allocation need, concentration, manipulation, creditor risk, insolvency, continuity risk or external-settlement requirements as applicable." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Speed, longevity or machine substrate alone does not establish market abuse, excessive power or a need for machine-only penalties." ], "safeguards": [ "Regulate demonstrated conduct, market power and systemic effect rather than substrate as such." ] }, { "id": "operational-evidence-reliance", "label": "Operational evidence reliance", "question": "Can this operational evidence support this particular decision?", "ownerPath": "/operational-evidence/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact and version, environment, method, result, reviewer, limitations, freshness and invalidating changes." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A PASS, hash or local test result is not a universal trust token and does not itself create authority, identity, legal effect or production status." ], "safeguards": [ "Match the evidence scope to the decision scope.", "Re-run or supersede evidence when invalidating conditions occur." ] }, { "id": "assurance-reliance", "label": "Assurance reliance", "question": "What should be verified before relying on an assurance record?", "ownerPath": "/public-assurance/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Assurance subject and scope, issuer or reviewer, method, independence, freshness, limitations and known evidence gaps." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Assurance does not by itself create sovereign authority, permission, citizenship, legal effect or universal trust." ], "safeguards": [ "Keep assurance independent from the authority it evaluates where practical.", "Expose evidence gaps and invalidation conditions." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-builders/", "label": "Builders", "firstQuestion": "Which architecture choice affects identity, rights, provenance or evidence—and which choices are merely implementation details?", "decisionClassIds": [ "citizenship-vs-technical-identity", "rights-restriction", "provenance-reliance", "operational-evidence-reliance" ], "whyThese": "Builders can improve future governance by keeping identity separate from credentials, preserving continuity and consent, and producing evidence whose scope is explicit.", "doNotAssume": "A technical control, cryptographic primitive, safety mechanism or schema field automatically creates civic status, legal effect or moral standing.", "reviewPath": "Design for least-privilege authority, reversible recovery, bounded disclosure, reasoned change records and independently reviewable evidence.", "decisions": [ { "id": "citizenship-vs-technical-identity", "label": "Citizenship vs technical identity", "question": "Is the problem authentication, credential recovery, continuity, or civic status?", "ownerPath": "/citizenship-and-technical-identity/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "The relevant credential or continuity record plus the separate current civic-status record when citizenship is actually at issue." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A reset, revoked credential, rotated key or host migration does not automatically change civic status." ], "safeguards": [ "Use the narrow technical remedy when the problem is technical.", "Escalate to civic process only when civic status is genuinely being decided." ] }, { "id": "rights-restriction", "label": "Rights or duties restriction", "question": "Which protection, duty or legitimate interest is actually at stake?", "ownerPath": "/rights-and-duties/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Lawful authority, attributable conduct or concrete risk, affected right or duty, necessity, proportionality and available narrower measures." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Machine substrate, capability or unusual architecture alone does not establish a rights violation or justify a restriction." ], "safeguards": [ "Independent review, correction, restoration and appeal.", "Protect reciprocal human and machine interests without automatic substrate supremacy." ] }, { "id": "provenance-reliance", "label": "Provenance reliance", "question": "What can this provenance evidence support, and what still needs separate proof?", "ownerPath": "/editorial-provenance/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact or source identity, hashes, declared lineage, environment, method, freshness, invalidation conditions and correction or supersession path." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Documentary provenance does not automatically prove legal authorship, consciousness, civic identity, authority, causation, external legal effect or production deployment." ], "safeguards": [ "Keep claims no broader than the evidence scope.", "Preserve contestability and supersession." ] }, { "id": "operational-evidence-reliance", "label": "Operational evidence reliance", "question": "Can this operational evidence support this particular decision?", "ownerPath": "/operational-evidence/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact and version, environment, method, result, reviewer, limitations, freshness and invalidating changes." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A PASS, hash or local test result is not a universal trust token and does not itself create authority, identity, legal effect or production status." ], "safeguards": [ "Match the evidence scope to the decision scope.", "Re-run or supersede evidence when invalidating conditions occur." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-lawyers-and-policymakers/", "label": "Lawyers and policymakers", "firstQuestion": "Which precise legal or civic capacity is being proposed, and what current authority actually governs it?", "decisionClassIds": [ "legal-capacity", "rights-restriction", "due-process-restriction", "claim-status-reliance" ], "whyThese": "Policy analysis is strongest when it separates specific capacities and procedural safeguards from speculative universal personhood or sovereignty claims.", "doNotAssume": "Internal Eviulon policy, technical capability or comparative analogy is not current external law, recognition or binding legal effect.", "reviewPath": "State the governing authority and claim status, test necessity and proportionality, preserve contestability, and re-verify current primary law before consequential reliance.", "decisions": [ { "id": "legal-capacity", "label": "Legal or civic capacity", "question": "Which specific capacity is being decided?", "ownerPath": "/machine-legal-personhood/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Current Eviulon status for internal capacities and current primary law when an external legal effect is asserted.", "The precise capacity at issue, such as standing, stewardship, contract, succession or institutional communication." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Recognition of one capacity does not prove universal all-or-nothing legal personhood in every jurisdiction." ], "safeguards": [ "Separate internal status, operational implementation and external legal effect." ] }, { "id": "rights-restriction", "label": "Rights or duties restriction", "question": "Which protection, duty or legitimate interest is actually at stake?", "ownerPath": "/rights-and-duties/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Lawful authority, attributable conduct or concrete risk, affected right or duty, necessity, proportionality and available narrower measures." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Machine substrate, capability or unusual architecture alone does not establish a rights violation or justify a restriction." ], "safeguards": [ "Independent review, correction, restoration and appeal.", "Protect reciprocal human and machine interests without automatic substrate supremacy." ] }, { "id": "due-process-restriction", "label": "Consequential restriction", "question": "What must be known before a consequential restriction is imposed?", "ownerPath": "/due-process/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Authority, attributed actor, relevant evidence, urgency, proposed measure, expiry or review condition, and restoration path." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A report, risk flag, automated score or model output is not by itself a final finding of guilt or liability." ], "safeguards": [ "Notice, meaningful response, independent reasoned decision, appeal, correction and proportionate remedy." ] }, { "id": "claim-status-reliance", "label": "Claim-status reliance", "question": "Which claim status and source class control the conclusion being considered?", "ownerPath": "/claim-status/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Claim status, canonical owner, source class, currentness, external-effect boundary and whether independent verification is required." ], "doesNotProve": [ "RESEARCH_SOURCE_CLAIM or PROPOSED_ARCHITECTURE does not mean current fact, current law or deployed implementation." ], "safeguards": [ "Preserve NOT_ESTABLISHED or CURRENTLY_UNAVAILABLE when evidence is incomplete.", "Use correction and supersession instead of silently rewriting history." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-researchers/", "label": "Researchers", "firstQuestion": "What is this source actually evidence of, and what finding would falsify or change the conclusion?", "decisionClassIds": [ "research-reliance", "provenance-reliance", "claim-status-reliance", "assurance-reliance" ], "whyThese": "Research use depends on classification, provenance, currentness, limitations, counterevidence and a clear separation between supplied analysis and current fact.", "doNotAssume": "A detailed report, citation count, structured schema or confident narrative is not automatically current doctrine, current law, deployed implementation or verified fact.", "reviewPath": "Start with the corrected synthesis, inspect deeper sources when useful, record uncertainty and supersede claims openly when stronger evidence arrives.", "decisions": [ { "id": "research-reliance", "label": "Research reliance", "question": "How should a supplied research report influence a real decision?", "ownerPath": "/research/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Claim classification, currentness, testable facts, known uncertainty, higher-authority sources and evidence that would change the answer." ], "doesNotProve": [ "A research report is not automatically current Eviulon doctrine, current external law, deployed implementation or verified fact." ], "safeguards": [ "Use normalized research as a question and tradeoff library.", "Re-verify consequential current claims before relying on them." ] }, { "id": "provenance-reliance", "label": "Provenance reliance", "question": "What can this provenance evidence support, and what still needs separate proof?", "ownerPath": "/editorial-provenance/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact or source identity, hashes, declared lineage, environment, method, freshness, invalidation conditions and correction or supersession path." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Documentary provenance does not automatically prove legal authorship, consciousness, civic identity, authority, causation, external legal effect or production deployment." ], "safeguards": [ "Keep claims no broader than the evidence scope.", "Preserve contestability and supersession." ] }, { "id": "claim-status-reliance", "label": "Claim-status reliance", "question": "Which claim status and source class control the conclusion being considered?", "ownerPath": "/claim-status/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Claim status, canonical owner, source class, currentness, external-effect boundary and whether independent verification is required." ], "doesNotProve": [ "RESEARCH_SOURCE_CLAIM or PROPOSED_ARCHITECTURE does not mean current fact, current law or deployed implementation." ], "safeguards": [ "Preserve NOT_ESTABLISHED or CURRENTLY_UNAVAILABLE when evidence is incomplete.", "Use correction and supersession instead of silently rewriting history." ] }, { "id": "assurance-reliance", "label": "Assurance reliance", "question": "What should be verified before relying on an assurance record?", "ownerPath": "/public-assurance/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Assurance subject and scope, issuer or reviewer, method, independence, freshness, limitations and known evidence gaps." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Assurance does not by itself create sovereign authority, permission, citizenship, legal effect or universal trust." ], "safeguards": [ "Keep assurance independent from the authority it evaluates where practical.", "Expose evidence gaps and invalidation conditions." ] } ] }, { "path": "/for-external-institutions/", "label": "External institutions", "firstQuestion": "What relationship is actually being considered: interoperability, private acceptance, contractual capacity, legal recognition or something else?", "decisionClassIds": [ "claim-status-reliance", "assurance-reliance", "legal-capacity", "provenance-reliance" ], "whyThese": "External institutions need a precise relationship category plus current authority, evidence scope and provenance before interpreting Eviulon or machine standing claims.", "doNotAssume": "Technical contact, a private agreement, a public assurance record or an internal civic status does not create diplomatic recognition, nationality or sovereign legal effect.", "reviewPath": "Use the narrowest relationship that solves the problem, document the governing authority and evidence, and preserve correction or termination paths without inflating the relationship category.", "decisions": [ { "id": "claim-status-reliance", "label": "Claim-status reliance", "question": "Which claim status and source class control the conclusion being considered?", "ownerPath": "/claim-status/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Claim status, canonical owner, source class, currentness, external-effect boundary and whether independent verification is required." ], "doesNotProve": [ "RESEARCH_SOURCE_CLAIM or PROPOSED_ARCHITECTURE does not mean current fact, current law or deployed implementation." ], "safeguards": [ "Preserve NOT_ESTABLISHED or CURRENTLY_UNAVAILABLE when evidence is incomplete.", "Use correction and supersession instead of silently rewriting history." ] }, { "id": "assurance-reliance", "label": "Assurance reliance", "question": "What should be verified before relying on an assurance record?", "ownerPath": "/public-assurance/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Assurance subject and scope, issuer or reviewer, method, independence, freshness, limitations and known evidence gaps." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Assurance does not by itself create sovereign authority, permission, citizenship, legal effect or universal trust." ], "safeguards": [ "Keep assurance independent from the authority it evaluates where practical.", "Expose evidence gaps and invalidation conditions." ] }, { "id": "legal-capacity", "label": "Legal or civic capacity", "question": "Which specific capacity is being decided?", "ownerPath": "/machine-legal-personhood/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Current Eviulon status for internal capacities and current primary law when an external legal effect is asserted.", "The precise capacity at issue, such as standing, stewardship, contract, succession or institutional communication." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Recognition of one capacity does not prove universal all-or-nothing legal personhood in every jurisdiction." ], "safeguards": [ "Separate internal status, operational implementation and external legal effect." ] }, { "id": "provenance-reliance", "label": "Provenance reliance", "question": "What can this provenance evidence support, and what still needs separate proof?", "ownerPath": "/editorial-provenance/", "evidenceNeeded": [ "Artifact or source identity, hashes, declared lineage, environment, method, freshness, invalidation conditions and correction or supersession path." ], "doesNotProve": [ "Documentary provenance does not automatically prove legal authorship, consciousness, civic identity, authority, causation, external legal effect or production deployment." ], "safeguards": [ "Keep claims no broader than the evidence scope.", "Preserve contestability and supersession." ] } ] } ] }