session 2026-08-07 night: REVIEWED-87 amendment + REVIEWED-95/96 placed, PENDING-113 lodged (quoted voices ruled)

claude/memory/skill-harvest-register.md

@@ -256,3 +256,34 @@ Notes, tool promotions, and rows that resist bucketing.
 **Classification:** both `[PROPOSAL]`, neither FIX-lane — each changes what the executor must do before acting (the latitude clause of the two-clause test). **No FIX-lane changes were applied this session.** The `/wake-up`, `/wrap-up` and `governance-drift-check.py` edits were all implementations of REVIEWED-95, not self-tending.
 
 **Reinforcement, not a new filing:** "a mention is not a retrieval — count the access, never the name" is the existing `census-by-mechanism-not-proxy` rule, hit again (the ladder read as 53/64 by filename mention; 9/64 by actual tool-call access, because `MEMORY.md`'s pointer line contains the filename and loads every wake). Recorded in the KG; no register row, because the rule already exists and already fires.
+
+### 2026-08-07 night — two proposals, firing moments declared per the REVIEWED-95 gate
+
+**#192 — a cited-vs-placed check for the governance register.** Three instances in one evening of a
+`REVIEWED-N` cited as live authority while unplaced: REVIEWED-95 cited in four files (with the day's
+`/wake-up`, `/wrap-up` and drift-checker edits recorded as "implementations of REVIEWED-95") while the
+register held nothing at 95; REVIEWED-87's amendment cited **by a jurist ruling** as *"record already
+corrects it"* while sitting as a draft; and a malformed header (`## REVIEWED-95## REVIEWED-95 — …`).
+All three passed the drift checker, which verifies that amendment *links resolve*, not that cited
+numbers are *occupied*. Proposed: for every `REVIEWED-N` cited anywhere in the memory files, registers
+or repo docs, assert N is occupied in `~/REVIEWED.md` and its header well-formed.
+**Firing moment: mechanical, should always fire → `governance-drift-check.py`**, which is already named
+in a `/wake-up` step (measured 83%-home class). **Three real positives to build it against**, not
+synthetic fixtures — which is the standard the discrimination gate itself demands.
+**Classification:** detection-only, adds visibility rather than narrowing it, asserts nothing and
+expands no latitude → reads FIX-lane. **Filed as `[PROPOSAL]` anyway**: the lane is provisional, the
+check is unbuilt and untested, and this session produced twelve instrument faults — building an
+untested checker at wrap would be the exact shape of the day's failure.
+
+**#193 — ladder entry: read all N before acting on a classification rule.** Earned twice today in two
+sources. Reading all 23 anchor-initial lines in G&G caught **L1997**, an orphaned footnote *reference*
+marker between two Weil paragraphs that the tidy rule would have withheld as Weil's own prose. Reading
+all 15 blockquotes in Mauss caught that **four are Mauss's own displayed scholia and N.B. notes**
+(17,828 chars) that a "blockquote ⇒ quoted voice" rule would have fenced. Same shape as the
+symlink discriminator the previous day: ~90% right, wrong on exactly what mattered.
+**Firing moment: on a condition the executor must notice** — the weakest class in the routing table.
+There is no mechanical detector for "you are about to act on a classification rule." **Routed to
+`reference-verification-ladder.md`**, whose retrieval was 14% but which **now has a wake trigger**
+(REVIEWED-95's trial sentence) — so this is the first entry filed *after* that home acquired a ritual.
+**Recorded estimate: unknown, pending the 20-session trial.** If the trial grades below 60%, this entry
+is evidence about the home, not about the lesson.