AQ-PUBLIC-CLAIM-GATE — Claim approval procedure and forms

SCOPE: WHAT COUNTS AS A CLAIM

A claim is any statement about Akasha-Q — its architecture, its evidence, its schedule, its relationship to Visvambhara, or its position on the six-rung reach ladder — made to any reader or listener outside the immediate working group. Surface does not change the definition. A slide title, a figure caption, a sentence in a funding memo, a spoken answer in a demonstration, a line in a job description and a caption under a photograph are all claims and all pass the same gate. Internal working notes are not claims; the moment a working note is shown outside the group it becomes one.

The gate decides one question only: may this exact sentence be said, at this evidence level, under this assumption set, on this surface, now. It does not decide whether the underlying engineering is a good idea, and it does not restrict what may be built. It restricts only what may be asserted.

THE SIX STAGES

  +---------------------------------------------------------+
  |  S1 SUBMISSION     author files form fields F-01..F-16   |
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
              |
              v
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
  |  S2 ADMISSIBILITY  complete? ids real? vocabulary exact? |
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
        | pass                    | incomplete --> back to S1
        v
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
  |  S3 TRACE AUDIT    non-author walks the 3 steps          |
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
        | navigable               | blocked --> HOLD, and
        |                         | REMOVE from wall if posted
        v
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
  |  S4 TECHNICAL      entailed at the stated level?         |
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
        |
        v
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
  |  S5 WORDING        constrained-language adjudication     |
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
        |
        v
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
  |  S6 DISPOSITION    one state, recorded in L6             |
  +---------------------------------------------------------+
        |
        +--> approve                     -> wall entry created
        +--> approve with qualification  -> qualifier bound into text
        +--> defer                       -> returns to a named stage
        +--> revise after more evidence  -> named experiment or level
        +--> reject                      -> sentence barred, recorded

THE FIVE DECISION STATES

The gate deliberately reuses the decision grammar of L5 command authority. Q1 who submitted this, Q2 is the trace valid, Q3 is this surface authorised for this claim now, Q4 should it be said at all given the current evidence state. Q1–Q3 are hard constraints; Q4 can only reduce what Q1–Q3 allowed, never enlarge it.

REVIEW COMPOSITION AND INDEPENDENCE

• Quorum: three seated reviewers plus the custodian, who convenes, records and does not vote.
• Standing seat: L9 systems engineering & safety governance holds one seat at every sitting.
• Independence requirement: at least one seated reviewer must have authored no artefact in the claim's trace and must not sit in the claim author's reporting line. If no such person is available, the only lawful outcome is defer — the sitting does not proceed on the strength of goodwill.
• Navigator separation: the S3 navigator is never an author of the trace and never the chair. The navigator's finding on navigability is binding and is not a vote.
• Recusal: the claim author may attend, must answer questions, and may not vote or chair.
• L8 is advisory only: AI-assisted analysis may submit written notes pointing reviewers at artefacts or at internal inconsistencies. It holds no seat, casts no vote, and may never be cited as a supporting artefact for the truth of a claim. Its notes are recorded as advisory in the disposition.
• Blocking: a single reject at S5 blocks approval of that sentence; approval at S4 requires no dissent on entailment, with any dissent recorded verbatim in the disposition.

CLAIM SUBMISSION FORM

PARAPHRASE IS AN UNAPPROVED CLAIM

Operationally, every person who speaks for the programme carries the approved-sentence card for the surface they are on: the exact approved sentences, their chips, and their bound qualifiers. Off-card questions have one approved answer pattern — name the metric, state that it is undetermined, and state how a target will be established from measurement. Refusal is a permitted output, not a failure of the speaker (DC-3). After every sitting and every demonstration, off-card questions are logged and enter the gate at S1 as candidate claims.