Round 1 claimed ratification after a single round. Round 2 then found four
more blocking defects against the supposedly frozen text, two of them
introduced by round 1's own amendments. A ratification a later round
falsifies that quickly was not one, and leaving the claim standing would
make the status field mean nothing.
Status is now NOT RATIFIED, NOT DISPATCHABLE, pins NOT frozen, awaiting an
independent review round 3 against b842975. Freezing follows ratification;
it does not precede it and does not survive a withdrawal. No execution work
may begin -- not implementation, not staging, not partial work against "the
settled pins."
Also disambiguated the two senses of dispatchable that round 1 conflated.
Unblocked means the dependency chain cleared, true since bc06706.
Dispatchable means ratified and frozen and ready to execute, false. Reading
the first as the second is how this came to be ratified after one round.
Both prior rounds were run by the same agent that authored the amendments
under review. Round 3 is the first that will not be.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Ps1szk2mSfgp4Cz21eVH9x
Levi Neuwirth
b741e487e8