docs(governance): PENDING-99 — the quoted tier accepts 3 of 17 human-verified citations

Filed with the jurist package pointer and its containment proof (16/16 clauses
contained, 9/9 inversion-built controls absent). Carries an explicit send-state
marker: filed is not sent.

Refs studium-engine c67586d.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AB3Kryoy6b1pm2Nz1DYdLh

PENDING.md

@@ -875,3 +875,44 @@ The verdict mark was tightened by the same logic: `✓ warranted` beside a silen
 **Recommendation:** (b). (a) alone reproduces the exact failure this census exists to name — a record that exists and is never read is indistinguishable from no record. The wake already reads a digest daily and already reports pointer counts and drift counts; a firing-count line is the same shape and costs one script change. (c) is good practice but relies on a slot that will be skipped under pressure; (d) is honest but gives up something recoverable cheaply.
 **Files affected:** `~/dotfiles/scripts/wake-digest.py`; `~/.claude/hooks/verify-before-compose.sh`; `~/_Dev/chamber-library/_curation/tool-evolution-log.md` (the discipline statement). **None touched.**
 **Awaiting:** Steward authorization.
+
+---
+
+## PENDING-99 — The quoted tier accepts 3 of 17 human-verified citations, and the largest single cause is a full stop
+**Date:** 2026-08-05
+**Tag:** [PROPOSAL] — routes to the **jurist**: `fidelity_equivalence@N` bumps require jurist ratification (V0 Ruling §2.2), and the fold-list is closed by construction.
+**Summary:** Run against the phase-2 Mauss gold — 17 citations a human read, cited and audited in March, 0 fabricated — the ratified quoted tier verdicts `GUARANTEED` on **3 of 17**. The failures are almost entirely ordinary scholarly quotation practice, not corpus defects; the single largest contributor is a **terminal full stop the citing human added when truncating**, worth 5 of the 17 on its own.
+
+**How this was measured (first production call of `verify_quote`; census 02 found it had no caller anywhere).**
+Every quote was taken from the round `.txt` files (the verbatim French), not the session-log YAML (chapter refs only). Containment was tested against the current canonical under `engine/fidelity.py`'s own `fidelity_normalize` — the ratified relation, not a hand-rolled one — then re-tested with one convention relaxed at a time:
+
+| relaxation | accepted | marginal |
+|---|---|---|
+| `fidelity_equivalence@2` as ratified | **3/17** | — |
+| + markup excluded (`[^n]` markers, `_emphasis_`) | 6/17 | +3 |
+| + the quote's own elision (`[…]`) treated as a gap | 6/17 | +0 |
+| + quotation-mark form `'` ↔ `"` | 6/17 | +0 |
+| + space-before-punctuation in the canonical | 7/17 | +1 |
+| **+ trailing period dropped from the quote** | **12/17** | **+5** |
+
+**Controls.** A fabricated French sentence is absent under *every* relaxation including the fullest (the ladder never degenerates into accept-anything). `verify_quote` was positive-controlled independently: it verdicts `GUARANTEED` on a true quote at its true anchor, and on the known mislocation it returned `NOT-FOUND` **plus `⚠ found-elsewhere: lines 1181–1181 — the claimed anchor is wrong`**, locating the error without being told. The 5 that remain absent at full relaxation are genuine internal elisions and the one close paraphrase the March audit itself recorded — correctly unverifiable, and not part of this ask.
+
+**Two facts about the gold, established by mechanism, incidental to the ask but load-bearing for P5.** (i) **17/17 fail at their *stated* anchors** — the canonical was re-hashed twice after March (2026-06-12 footnote cleaning; 2026-06-16 line shift) and every line-ref is stale by one; this is exactly what V2 §14.1's **P5** exists to repair, now measured rather than asserted. (ii) The session log's header arithmetic (`14 verified + 1 + 1`) does not total its own `17`; extracting the citation blocks mechanically yields **17**, so V2 §1.5's reading (15+1+1) is the consistent one and the log header carries the typo. My earlier flag that V2 had mis-read the census was wrong and is withdrawn.
+
+**Rationale — why this is a ruling and not a bug.** Every one of these failures lands on the *safe* side of the ratified asymmetry: abstention, never false trust. Nothing here is behaving incorrectly. What the number says is narrower and harder: **the quoted tier as ratified cannot verify a competent scholar's ordinary citation practice**, and the chavruta — the engine's reason for being — *is* that practice. An organ that accepts 3 of 17 genuine citations cannot serve quotation-checking for the use it was built for.
+
+The four causes are not one kind of thing, and that is the substance of the ask:
+- **Markup crossing (+3).** Named already at V2 §1.6 as the largest single Tier-1 finding and flagged unruled at §11.1. The chamber constitution has arguably already decided the principle in the other direction: §V holds the inline anchor marker to be *"content-for-the-reader but **not a prose word**"*, **excluded** from the prose-word-identity comparison, and §II.3 binds the marker to *"not corrupt the prose-word-identity check under §V"*. §V also calls a note's display number *"a carrier artifact"*. So chamber and engine currently take **opposite positions on the same object**, and the engine consumes the chamber's canonicals. Whether a pandoc `[^n]` *is* §II.3's inline anchor marker (whose exclusion is ratified) or a distinct apparatus reference marker is precisely the scope question, and it is not mine.
+- **Terminal punctuation (+5).** Not a form fold at all. Dropping a trailing period accepts a quote that is *not byte-contained* — a different class of act from folding `’`→`'`, and the one carrying real risk.
+- **Space-before-punctuation (+1).** A French-typography artifact in the canonical; plausibly a cleaning-gate concern under V0 Ruling §2.4 rather than a relation question.
+- **Elision (+0 here, but 5 of the residual).** Structural, not typographic. Folding it would let a quote skip arbitrary text. My position is that it must **not** be folded — the correct remedy is that an elided quote is a *multi-span* citation and should be modelled as such, which is the same shape as the two-span composite resolved under D-1 today.
+
+**Options.** (a) Rule the markup class only — the narrowest bump, already evidenced, and arguably just aligning the engine with a chamber principle already ratified. (b) (a) plus a *quotation-truncation* allowance for terminal punctuation, defined as its own named class rather than smuggled into the fold-list, since it is not a form equivalence. (c) Rule nothing yet; treat 3/17 as the measured Tier-1 cost and require the chavruta to cite by *constructed* citation (engine-emitted, carrying `text_original` bytes, immune by construction) rather than by reasoner-typed quote. (d) Decline all, and accept that the quoted tier is for machine-constructed citations only, declaring that limit on its own output.
+
+**Recommendation:** **(c) now, (a) next, (b) only on its own evidence.** (c) is available immediately, requires no ruling, and is honest: the failure class bites *reasoner-typed* quotes and construction-side citations are immune, so the chavruta can be built to cite the way the engine is already sound at. (a) is the narrowest widening and the one where a chamber/engine divergence — not a preference — is the argument. (b) is where I would most expect to be wrong: +5 is the biggest prize and therefore the most tempting, and "accept a quote that isn't contained" is exactly the kind of loosening that reads as harmless and is not. It should need its own adversarial evidence, not this table.
+
+**What I am not asking for.** No fold applied, no relation bumped, nothing wired. `fidelity_equivalence@2` governs unchanged. This item carries the incidence V2 §11.1 said a ruling would require, and the scope question §V/§II.3 raise against it.
+
+**Files affected:** none touched. Evidence reproducible from `chamber-library` canonical `essai-sur-le-don-mauss.md` (sha `2889709555f2…`) + the phase-2 round files in the vault + `engine/verify_quote.py`, `engine/fidelity.py`.
+**Jurist package:** `studium-engine/docs/quoted-tier-acceptance-JURIST-PACKAGE-2026-08-05.md` (commit `c67586d`) — self-contained, five gate questions Q1–Q5 with executor leans. Verbatim containment proven mechanically before filing: **16/16 quoted clauses contained · 9/9 inversion-built controls absent · INSTRUMENT VERIFIED**. Every cited path re-verified in session.
+**Awaiting:** Steward routing to the jurist. **Filed ≠ sent** — this line is the send-state marker; update it when relayed.