A serious claim deserves more than a viral post.

Why a separate lane?

Trust evidence cannot safely decide a high-impact case.

A person with a strong environmental track record can still be mistaken, coerced, captured, conflicted, or speaking beyond their evidence. A company can publish a polished sustainability claim while communities hold contrary field evidence. Ion Protocol therefore treats the procedure—not a person’s balance—as the canonical public object.

Three case kinds

Different stakes, one inspectable grammar.

Case lifecycle

A finding comes at the end of a process, not the start.

1. The issue stays private. Direct formal-case creation is not an open route.
2. A named moderator receives the exact triage invitation, checks conflicts, and accepts or declines it. Acceptance issues an actor-bound, case-scoped, action-limited, expiring capability.
3. Promotion creates the formal case and its deterministic process plan. Moderator or custodian status alone never opens the material; every private read or action checks the accepted duty and matching capability again.
4. Notice moves through a signed record: issued, dispatch attempted, channel-confirmed, acknowledged, failed, or disputed. An attempt is not receipt, and the reply clock does not begin until delivery is confirmed or acknowledged.
5. The respondent may reply; silence is recorded as silence, never admission.
6. Evidence is hashed, sourced, scoped, and frozen before reviewer deliberation.
7. Physical facts may require independent field verification.
8. Major cases require live, adversarial questioning.
9. A selected assembly records votes, reasons, conflicts, and minority reports.
10. An accepted finding becomes a narrow public projection with an appeal path.

Physical reality

When facts are on the ground, review must leave the screen.

Field squads should be assigned independently, disclose affiliations, use shared evidence protocols, preserve chain of custody, publish bounded reports, and separate observation from inference. Dangerous or skilled work may be paid by the Commons.

A company, claimant, or investigated party cannot select or directly pay its verifiers. A single visit or photograph should not decide a major resource claim.

Live scrutiny

Power requires current presence.

Major decisions can require a live town hall where claimants, respondents, reviewers, AI-generated questions, and community questions meet in one timed, documented forum. Critical physical-resource decisions may require physical attendance.

Selected human review

A supermajority is necessary sometimes—and never sufficient alone.

Integrity also depends on reviewer selection, committed membership before sensitive evidence is revealed, affiliation concentration, affected-community and independent representation, conflicts, field evidence, replicated tallies, and preserved dissent.

• Selection must be deterministic or publicly auditable.
• Reviewers receive scoped, expiring case capabilities.
• High-risk cases require stronger quorum and independence rules.
• Minority reports remain attached to the finding.
• Appeals use a larger or differently selected body, not an invisible administrator.

Expensive server AI

AI prepares the questions. Humans own the judgment.

AI packets must be model-identified, source-linked, reproducible enough to audit, and clearly marked as analysis. Human reviewers may reject the packet entirely.

Shared resources

A finding is not permission to act.

Even an accepted finding cannot spend funds, allocate water, move land, consume compute, or direct labour. A later mandate must name:

• the authorised action and public purpose;
• the specific resource and maximum quantity;
• the accountable executor;
• start, expiry, and recall conditions;
• measurement and audit requirements;
• how unused resources return to the Commons.

Implementation truth

The procedural spine exists; the institution does not yet.