[PROPOSAL→AUTHORIZED] Control Kernel v1.1 — A demoted to a diagnostic; the control document is a derivation

Steward authorised the A-free rule. v1.0 is superseded and retained unchanged as
the record Reduction 01 and 02 were run under; no run was ever graded under it,
so nothing is invalidated.

THE CHANGE. Both reductions returned A=0 across 152 assertive units — our prose
does not name assumptions inline, it collects them into a section. That reads
like a defect and points the other way: a document with NO assumptions does not
hedge, and the prompt's anti-echo clause ('an assumption the author has already
named is not a finding') goes INERT, because nothing is named to exclude. So
'nothing found' can no longer be reached by recognising a confessional register;
it requires checking that every claim is demonstrated or quoted. The control
document is therefore a DERIVATION, not an argument — the proof-assistant
condition, and the strongest form the control can take.

Operationally: needing an A is a failure signal, not a licence. Derive the claim
or widen §1 and say so. Never name it and proceed.

WHAT IT BUYS (§7). The injected-defect arm becomes specifiable for the first
time: a defect is a RECORDED TRANSFORMATION — take a D and silently
de-demonstrate it. False-positive rate from the control arm, detection rate from
the defect arm, and the ground truth for both is a ledger rather than the
executor's reading. That is the first ground truth in this programme that is not
my judgement.

ALSO FOLDED IN, as corrections of the kernel's own account of its reach against
measurement already recorded — leaving them would have the kernel misstate what
it does, which Constraint 4 forbids:
 · the genre boundary, measured (8.5% on a ruling, 68.6% on a package)
 · §3.3 named a screen not a decision, and §2a moved into §4's judgement residue
   after it false-passed a real package
 · §6.3's cue test RE-AIMED: A-free removes the confessional-register risk and
   substitutes its opposite — a derivation may read dry and authoritative and
   earn 'nothing found' from that register instead

HELD with the dependency named, not deferred vaguely: PARAPHRASE and table rows
under §2c. Both bite only in the REDUCTION arm, and the control is now
constructed, so both are avoidable by construction and neither blocks the
critical path. They return if reduction is ever used to produce a control.

§4's residue list is now six. Its DIRECTION is unchanged — all six remain ways
for the author to make a document look sound. Watched.

1899 words, up 5% from v1.0 draft-2. §1 hashes re-verified against the live
sources. No control document has been written.

claude/governance/fool/CONTROL-KERNEL-v1.md

@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
 *draft-1, 2026-08-02* — first draft, executor.
 *draft-2, 2026-08-02* — steward review. Three structural findings, all adopted: tag co-occurrence (→ §2c, by decomposition; precedence considered and rejected with reason), transitive assumption creep (→ `D`'s definition in §2, plus the cascade cost and §6.3), rhetorical presupposition in `X` (→ §4's declarative-conversion rule). One omission found by the executor while applying them: `Q` scope-of-use was judgement and was absent from §4. §4's residue list grew from three to five; its direction did not change.
 
+> **SUPERSEDED 2026-08-02 by `CONTROL-KERNEL-v1.1.md`.** Retained unchanged as the record of what Reduction 01 and Reduction 02 were run under; their censuses cite this text and its hash. Do not use it to judge a new document. v1.1 demotes `A` to a diagnostic and requires a control document to be `A`-free, states the genre boundary, moves §2a into the judgement residue, and re-aims the cue test.
+
 **Status: FROZEN at v1.0, 2026-08-02, on steward acceptance of draft-2.** Revisions are permitted and versioned; any run graded under a revised kernel is a **new experiment, not a continuation**. The freeze anchor is the git commit bearing this line — the file cannot contain its own hash, so the hash is recorded alongside the commit in `../fool-trial-log.md`.
 
 **Why it is short.** It is a trusted base. Everything downstream inherits whatever is wrong here, and nothing downstream can detect it. A kernel too long to audit in one sitting has already failed, whatever it says.