[FIX] REVIEWED-134: suspend automatic grading, with a replacement terminus

The steward's ruling of 2026-09-04 amends REVIEWED-123 condition 2. Applied as
data, in the deferral record's own vocabulary: no code changed, and
governance-drift-check.py:513 stays excluded from repair and unexamined, as the
ruling's Notes require. The counter still counts and still fires at 84; what a
firing INSTRUCTS is now recording, not grading.

Condition 3 replaces the terminus that suspension removed. Grading at 84 was the
ladder hold's only terminal bound, so the suspension carries its own: the joint
PENDING-178/-179 ruling, or 2026-10-15, whichever falls first. That bound is given
a trigger rather than a memory — a dated DEFERRED-DECISION block whose discriminator
states, in its own text, that firing returns the falsifier for a steward ruling and
does not resume grading (condition 4). PENDING-168 is the reason it is not left to care.

N-now at suspension, measured live by the trial's own method: 65 = 41 real + 24
mumble (36.9%), distance 19. Unchanged from 2026-09-03 in count and composition.

Left knowingly wrong, and recorded rather than fixed: the /wake-up trial line still
reads "Graded automatically at 84 transcripts". It is the trial's own intervention
text, frozen by its own terms and by REVIEWED-123 condition 1; rewording it would
confound the measurement the suspension exists to protect.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01X3L79vgAnt1x2kxvf23Qt7

REVIEWED.md

@@ -2612,4 +2612,89 @@ partial read of the file, and the third rests on a fact only the executor establ
 the PENDING-137 entry at 127–131 with the direction and its epistemic status as siblings to
 the existing fields; attach the en-cell note at line 370 on the `taggable: false` line. Then
 place the amendment. Then PENDING-134's disclosure, whose before-state is now complete. Then
-`ratio_A_to_B` re-derived **once**, per REVIEWED-116 point 5.
+`ratio_A_to_B` re-derived **once**, per REVIEWED-116 point 5.
+
+## REVIEWED-134 — Steward-originated — Suspension of automatic grading at `trigger_fired()`, and a replacement terminus for the ladder hold
+**Date:** 2026-09-04
+**Decision:** AUTHORIZED. Amends REVIEWED-123 condition 2.
+
+**Notes:** This is not a repair, not a filter, and not PENDING-178 option (b).
+Nothing about what the counter counts changes. `governance-drift-check.py:513`
+remains excluded from repair and unexamined, per the 2026-09-03 handover.
+
+The warrant is REVIEWED-123's own §7, which declined option (c) on the ground
+that a recorded confound on a design of this power is close to no result and
+'would leave REVIEWED-95's causal claim appearing to rest on a graded trial
+while resting on nothing — worse than an ungraded claim, because it launders
+the gap'. An automatic grade at 84 over the population now measured produces
+exactly that outcome, arriving by machinery rather than by decision, against an
+instrument REVIEWED-123 states cannot be re-run. The reasoning is not new here;
+it is the same reasoning reaching a case the ruling did not anticipate.
+
+The mechanism is on the record as verified in code — PENDING-147:
+`governance-drift-check.py:trigger_fired()` → `len(TRANSCRIPTS.glob("*.jsonl"))
+>= 84`, with REVIEWED-95's falsifier grading automatically on that condition.
+Measured live 2026-09-03 (PENDING-179): N = 65 = 41 real + 24 mumble, 36.9%.
+Distance to threshold, 19.
+
+1. **Automatic grading is suspended.** `trigger_fired()` does not grade
+   REVIEWED-95's falsifier on reaching 84. The counter continues to count and
+   is not modified.
+
+2. **Crossing 84 during the suspension is recorded, not graded.** Record the
+   date of crossing and the real/mumble split on that date. A crossing is
+   evidence for the ruling that lifts this suspension; it is not a trigger and
+   produces no grade.
+
+3. **Replacement terminus.** Grading at 84 is the ladder hold's only terminal
+   bound. REVIEWED-123 condition 2 made that bound visible — the N-now
+   obligation and the 30-day review — but expressly declined to make the review
+   an automatic lift, so it cannot serve as a substitute terminus. Suspending
+   the grade therefore removes the sole terminus and must not leave the hold
+   open. **This suspension lapses on the joint PENDING-178 / PENDING-179
+   ruling, or on 2026-10-15, whichever falls first.**
+
+4. **Lapse returns the question for a ruling, not for resumption.** On the lapse
+   date automatic grading does not resume by default. The falsifier returns for
+   a steward decision that states, at minimum, which population it would grade
+   over. PENDING-147 leg (i) note 3 already records the two populations as
+   divergent: 21 of the baseline's 64 transcripts were gone before preservation
+   ran, 43 survive, and the 14% baseline is no longer fully auditable. Grading
+   requires a stated store. Read as 'suspend then resume', this ruling merely
+   moves the confound six weeks.
+
+5. **REVIEWED-123 condition 2's reporting obligation survives unchanged, and is
+   enriched.** N-now continues to be reported at wake, and now reports its
+   real/mumble split alongside the total. Condition 2's concern was a hold with
+   no visible distance to expiry; the distance stays visible, and its
+   composition becomes visible with it. The 30-day review point of 2026-09-16
+   stands and is not discharged by this ruling.
+
+6. **What this ruling does not decide.** The unit, the window, the recurrence
+   mechanism, the session predicate, and the seeding-and-store question belong
+   to the joint PENDING-178 / PENDING-179 ruling. This act buys that ruling
+   room; it does not anticipate it.
+
+7. **Scope, and what is testimony.** I read PENDING-178, PENDING-179,
+   PENDING-147 and REVIEWED-123 verbatim via `governance_item`, and
+   `governance_state` live. The transcript counts, the real/mumble split, the
+   leak mechanism and the archive figures are executor testimony from
+   instruments no tool available here can run — `governance_*` reaches the
+   governance documents and stops there. This ruling does not depend on their
+   precise values; it depends on the contamination being material and the
+   distance being short, both of which hold across a wide range of them.
+
+8. ⚠ **A disagreement recorded, not resolved, because it bears on the joint
+   ruling rather than on this one.** PENDING-147 leg (i) records preservation
+   discharged 2026-08-19 — 47 files, 114 MB, to `~/.claude-transcript-archive/
+   raw/`. PENDING-179 states preservation has run twice only, 2026-08-26 and
+   2026-09-03, reconstructing from `~/_Dev/claude-transcript-archive` at 76
+   files. Three dates where two are claimed, two paths, and a four-file gap in
+   the archive's own history. PENDING-179's gate 2b calls its reconstruction a
+   demonstrated lower bound *because* preservation ran twice; if an 08-19 run
+   exists and is uncounted, that bound is stated wrongly. **Query before the
+   joint ruling, not before this one.**
+
+**If AUTHORIZED:** apply the suspension; nothing else in the counting path is
+touched. Report N-now with its real/mumble split at the next wake. Set
+2026-10-15 as a return-for-ruling, not an expiry.