Review decisions and sources

Section 22 of 22

The sections above define the DAO's operating rules. This record explains the design decisions and the review findings behind them. Earlier documents provide historical context.

Review point	Treatment in this handbook	Reason
Review section 2, full-diff coverage	Adopted with the final check at U06 and preliminary scoping at U02.	U02 may precede implementation. Coverage must apply to the actual diff, and passing tests alone cannot detect a newly untested behavior. The task sets required evidence without adding a second release verdict.
Both reviews, founding challenge gap	Public factual and interpretive intake qualifies through C02 before voting exists.	An empty or undefined membership roster cannot support a meaningful window. Disabling interpretive challenges would leave policy mistakes without an existing failing test harder to contest.
Review section 3, a bundle verifies itself	Not adopted. Reproduction and policy checks remain required.	Authentication and a supplied bundle do not establish that the claimed result occurred or that its expected outcome is correct.
Review section 4 and third opinion finding 2, token funding	Retained the selected tax and EPOCHE service-payment capability. Added net-payout integration tests and separate activation prerequisites.	The mechanics were expressly chosen. Unverified forecasts or broad venue claims cannot overturn them. Measured incompatibility can block a particular route and justify a later amendment.
Review section 4, service-funded burning	Named the EPOCHE purchase and burn explicitly, including in the required administrative assessment.	Converting other-asset service revenue to tokens is an actual operation with cost and responsibilities. An older exclusion does not override the later chosen design.
Opposing threshold recommendations	Chose a token inventory target with a separate funded-reserve check.	Token units make the routing target deterministic. Protected liabilities need their own coverage because token counts do not guarantee dollars. A dollar oracle in every routing decision is unnecessary for this separation.
Third opinion finding 3, split crossing	Adopted splitting with an explicit equality rule.	A single inflow can refill the exact gap and burn its excess. The earlier text's pre-transfer rule was ambiguous, but it does not follow that every such rule necessarily burns too much.
Review section 4, treasury cap	Separated restricted reserves and uncommitted reward inventory.	The rule governs designated inflows. Existing assets, outside deposits, and reserved balances do not disappear above the target, so the target is not a hard cap on all DAO assets.
Review section 5, promotion authority	Defined contract versus executor enforcement and moved the actual routine authority into the first rehearsal.	A founder signing the production action would not demonstrate autonomous execution. On-chain hashes do not prove off-chain tests.
Both reviews, one-operator founding	Specified the founding control and its recovery limit.	Separate role keys do not establish independent control. The reviews did not inspect live ownership, so their deployment assertions are not treated as verified facts.
Review section 7, coupled weakening	Retained one shared window, separate corpus notice, and the longer applicable duration.	This prevents timing shortcuts while avoiding two serial waits for the same coupled update.
Third opinion finding 4, held-out access	Added committed cases, a preassigned confidential examiner, public explanations, and an explicit narrower public challenge right.	Universal raw access would expose the holdout. A commitment alone does not make hidden evidence publicly inspectable, and automatic reveal can expose an unresolved exploit.
Third opinion finding 5, automatic remedies	Required coverage at adoption and when new service exposure is accepted.	Checking funds only after a promised remedy becomes due discovers underfunding too late.
Third opinion findings 7 and 8, evaluation costs	Added measured cost per attempt and accepted release, budgeted benchmark rotation, and requalification after material council changes.	An unaffordable mandatory evaluation stalls releases. Exposed benchmarks need fresh cases rather than repeated claims of independence.
Review section 8, council input structure	Added structured inventories, raw-source access, typed outputs, and scoped tools.	Structure limits accidental authority and aids inspection. Summaries and attachments remain untrusted and cannot replace the actual diff.
Review section 8, product-flow scope	Kept F3's logical states and trust dependencies.	Credential operations are part of the DAO's maintenance responsibilities. Product-specific pricing and APIs remain separate.
Review section 8, duplicate sources	Established one operating reference and retained the earlier documents as history.	Historical documents preserve the reasoning behind earlier decisions.
Review section 8, late findings and defaults	Retained changed-target resets and added concrete rehearsal and operating profiles.	A correction needs new relevant evidence and challenge access. Short test clocks and synthetic assets must remain distinguishable from production settings.
Third opinion smaller notes, unfunded intake	Allowed early reporting when triage capacity is funded, with clear contingent-award terms.	Findings can improve the corpus before funded awards open. Reproduction and regression work still consume resources.

Sources. These are the historical inputs behind this handbook, not operating rules; the DAO's rules are sections 1 through 21. The superseded drafts were removed from the working tree in commit 46d1fcb and stay recoverable from Git history under roadmap-notes/ at its parent, f91026a. They are named rather than linked so that reading the operative sections does not lead into a superseded draft.

Earlier operating rules: verifier-dao-plans-v2.md.
V2 review: verifier-dao-v2-review.md.
V2 third opinion: verifier-dao-v2-third-opinion.md.
V2 philosophy and workflow response: verifier-dao-v2-workflow-response.md.
Organized critique: verifier-dao-critique.md, with verifier-dao-critique-response.md, verifier-dao-opinion.md, and verifier-dao-second-opinion.md.
Earlier annotated rules: verifier-dao-plans.md. Writing guide: WRITING.md.

The older universal subjective release-verdict requirement remains superseded. The new coverage task examines the scope of required evidence before merge. U12 still applies the completed evidence and challenge rules automatically. The later 1% buy/sell tax and pool/burn instructions also take precedence over older token exclusions.