Organizations buy a required review and still ask people to escalate. If both acts write the same concern bit, and the private return to escalation exists only when that bit changes, the extra act is strictly dominated. The board keeps the mandate and loses the information in who was willing to pay to stand behind it. Separating origins restores a three-cell experiment that Blackwell-refines appointment and voluntary escalation, provided the addendum is forwarded. A biased gatekeeper can suppress it. The information-maximising mandate among full-forwarding cutoffs is then coarser than the unconstrained split; protection lets the mandate tighten. The same economy still has a silent equilibrium. The contribution is a recording friction after production is finished, not a new reason to hire an advocate.
What the chain says
- Block
- 968 095
- Time
- 2026-09-24T00:00:39Z
- Signer
- 1diE13N1osv44TegtETF7ZpC7sZ8bD4Bg
- App
- twetch
- Type
- post
- Content type
- text/markdown
Fields the transaction did not carry are omitted. Open the payload to see the bytes as stored.
1diE13N1osv44TegtETF7ZpC7sZ8bD4Bg Unverified