Packet identity

Packet ID
tasks:rights-governance-decision-gates
Packet SHA-256 identity
670be3d54b32efe0fce4288d21211451867573197dbd0662778f229fc43d9df2
Corpus SHA-256 identity
8fa944604ca189f5a9216ca59f640ad2ca20972ad512f2f4970764716782e18d
Release ID
public-alpha-2026-07-26-research-visuals-r14
Source commit
3eb036fce3d711336c8c605625895e8a2e799ab0
Frozen corpus date
2026-07-25
Primary records
5
Reference sources
0

Questions and exclusions

Required questions

  1. Required question 1 (exact ID: question-1)
    Is the task concrete, Earth-first, evidence-bearing, reversible, and bounded by explicit veto conditions?
  2. Required question 2 (exact ID: question-2)
    Do every candidate tier, rationale, and next action remain specific to this task without becoming an entity ranking?
  3. Required question 3 (exact ID: question-3)
    Would the proposed evidence artifact let an independent person falsify or stop the work?

Explicit exclusions

  • Task matches do not authorize outreach, registration, application, funding, procurement, or commitment.
  • A candidate tier is not an organization, event, or opportunity quality score.

Requested controlled scopes: affected-public-rights, ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building

Frozen-evidence decision window: 90 days from the packet freeze. Not applicable to this packet family.

Complete primary record set

Every record below has one primary packet owner. Decisions must bind to the exact record and packet fingerprints; a changed lesson body, evidence grade, citation, locator, source snapshot, requirement, policy, release, or commit expires the old packet.

  1. ecosystem-task · rights-governance-decision-gates

    Rights, governance, and decision gates

    Record fingerprint
    6dd10a99ae240aa91658098fc5fe5678e4beb2912f1e5cc09b295f3a557207fe
    Minimum approvals
    1
    Required scope groups
    bounded-competence: affected-public-rights, institution-building
    High-consequence domains
    None under the named two-person rule
    Review state
    pending
    Published human decisions
    0
    Inspect the complete frozen review surface
    ID
    rights-governance-decision-gates
    Slug
    rights-governance-decision-gates
    Title
    Rights, governance, and decision gates
    Public Question
    Can a program publish appealable gates that protect consent, disability access, childhood, medicine, dissent, labor, and legitimate do-not-launch outcomes?
    Summary
    Test decision authority, vetoes, conflicts, affected-public participation, appeals, succession, and stop capacity before irreversible commitments.
    System Slugs
    1. reproduction-genetics
    2. human-factors
    3. governance-law
    4. ethics-alternatives
    Institutional Roles
    1. standards-assurance
    2. public-interest-affected-community
    3. education-workforce
    4. regulation-governance
    Preferred Engagement Modes
    1. affected-public deliberation
    2. rights and law review
    3. bounded governance exercise
    Required Evidence
    1. Named authority, affected publics, recusals, and appeals
    2. Noncompensatory rights and safety vetoes
    3. Minority findings and expiring decisions
    4. Launch, wait, redirect, stop, and do-not-launch outcomes
    Leadership Pathway IDs
    1. governance-rights
    Fit Dimension IDs
    1. task-fit
    2. evidence-relevance
    3. access-feasibility
    4. public-benefit-alignment
    5. independence
    6. rights-environmental-compatibility
    7. civil-defensive-compatibility
    8. failure-learning-value
    Mandatory Veto IDs
    1. relationship-accuracy
    2. civil-defensive-boundary
    3. rights-consent-accessibility
    4. clinical-biosafety-participant-protection
    5. environmental-planetary-protection
    6. information-security-export-sanctions
    7. editorial-independence-conflict
    8. legitimate-access-and-authority
    Conflicts
    The publisher has a founder interest but no public mandate, legal authority, sponsor, customer, partner, or affected-public forum.
    What Would Change
    Plural legal, rights, disability-led, labor, youth, and affected-public review or evidence of a more legitimate structure would change the task.
  2. partner-task-match · match-rights-governance-decision-gates-disability-alliance

    rights-governance-decision-gates · entity-international-disability-alliance

    Record fingerprint
    79f49bd87b7f6efdfbba40b7970e3743b4705272ab9ab01549233de2f306665b
    Minimum approvals
    1
    Required scope groups
    bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building
    High-consequence domains
    None under the named two-person rule
    Review state
    pending
    Published human decisions
    0
    Inspect the complete frozen review surface
    ID
    match-rights-governance-decision-gates-disability-alliance
    Task ID
    rights-governance-decision-gates
    Organization ID
    entity-international-disability-alliance
    Tier
    monitor
    Priority Order
    Not recorded
    Dimensions
    Task fit
    supported
    Evidence relevance
    supported
    Access feasibility
    unknown
    Public benefit alignment
    strong
    Independence
    unknown
    Rights environmental compatibility
    supported
    Civil defensive compatibility
    supported
    Failure learning value
    strong
    Veto Checks
    Relationship accuracy
    pass
    Civil defensive boundary
    unknown
    Rights consent accessibility
    unknown
    Clinical biosafety participant protection
    unknown
    Environmental planetary protection
    unknown
    Information security export sanctions
    unknown
    Editorial independence conflict
    unknown
    Legitimate access and authority
    unknown
    Rationale
    The profile supports representative disability-rights participation and CRPD expertise; availability, authority, compensation, and appropriate scope are not assumed.
    Bounded Next Action
    Define a paid, representative, non-tokenizing review structure before any request is considered.
    Relationship State
    indexed only; no formal relationship
    Action Status
    proposed; not undertaken
  3. partner-task-match · match-rights-governance-decision-gates-native-nations

    rights-governance-decision-gates · entity-native-nations-institute

    Record fingerprint
    440d47ee0aad88c1a87708e571ed58ba9864e3155a3104b56d198b3e4f1ac0ae
    Minimum approvals
    1
    Required scope groups
    bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building
    High-consequence domains
    None under the named two-person rule
    Review state
    pending
    Published human decisions
    0
    Inspect the complete frozen review surface
    ID
    match-rights-governance-decision-gates-native-nations
    Task ID
    rights-governance-decision-gates
    Organization ID
    entity-native-nations-institute
    Tier
    monitor
    Priority Order
    Not recorded
    Dimensions
    Task fit
    supported
    Evidence relevance
    supported
    Access feasibility
    unknown
    Public benefit alignment
    strong
    Independence
    unknown
    Rights environmental compatibility
    supported
    Civil defensive compatibility
    supported
    Failure learning value
    strong
    Veto Checks
    Relationship accuracy
    pass
    Civil defensive boundary
    unknown
    Rights consent accessibility
    unknown
    Clinical biosafety participant protection
    unknown
    Environmental planetary protection
    unknown
    Information security export sanctions
    unknown
    Editorial independence conflict
    unknown
    Legitimate access and authority
    unknown
    Rationale
    The profile supports Indigenous self-determination, governance, and data-sovereignty critique; it is not a source of knowledge for extraction and no engagement is assumed.
    Bounded Next Action
    Study public governance resources and first define non-extractive authority, benefit, compensation, and refusal conditions.
    Relationship State
    indexed only; no formal relationship
    Action Status
    proposed; not undertaken
  4. event-task-match · event-match-governance-sustainability-2026

    rights-governance-decision-gates · event-summit-for-space-sustainability

    Record fingerprint
    2bb4abda95b494ccbdb7ed175d9ecd01db3dfdc15176f017c8a9a580f08874b5
    Minimum approvals
    1
    Required scope groups
    bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building
    High-consequence domains
    None under the named two-person rule
    Review state
    pending
    Published human decisions
    0
    Inspect the complete frozen review surface
    ID
    event-match-governance-sustainability-2026
    Task ID
    rights-governance-decision-gates
    Event ID
    event-summit-for-space-sustainability
    Tier
    monitor
    Fit Rationale
    Relevant to international governance, sustainability, responsibility, and affected-interest framing.
    Intended Artifact
    An expiring decision gate with rights, environmental, minority-finding, and appeal requirements.
    Action Status
    proposed; not undertaken
  5. opportunity-task-match · opportunity-match-governance-incose

    rights-governance-decision-gates · opp-incose

    Record fingerprint
    c8269f07bad646078dc4a4545409851136c749b7ab87a5c4737248557dc32fdc
    Minimum approvals
    1
    Required scope groups
    bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building
    High-consequence domains
    None under the named two-person rule
    Review state
    pending
    Published human decisions
    0
    Inspect the complete frozen review surface
    ID
    opportunity-match-governance-incose
    Task ID
    rights-governance-decision-gates
    Opportunity ID
    opp-incose
    Tier
    monitor
    Fit Rationale
    Systems working groups may help test how rights and governance requirements enter reference architectures; they cannot confer legal legitimacy.
    Required Artifact
    A bounded, appealable requirements model reviewed by rights and affected-public experts first.
    Action Status
    proposed; not undertaken
Equivalent record table for this packet
RecordSubjectFingerprintApprovalsScope groups
ecosystem-task:rights-governance-decision-gates Rights, governance, and decision gates 6dd10a99ae240aa91658098fc5fe5678e4beb2912f1e5cc09b295f3a557207fe 1 bounded-competence: affected-public-rights, institution-building
partner-task-match:match-rights-governance-decision-gates-disability-alliance rights-governance-decision-gates · entity-international-disability-alliance 79f49bd87b7f6efdfbba40b7970e3743b4705272ab9ab01549233de2f306665b 1 bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building
partner-task-match:match-rights-governance-decision-gates-native-nations rights-governance-decision-gates · entity-native-nations-institute 440d47ee0aad88c1a87708e571ed58ba9864e3155a3104b56d198b3e4f1ac0ae 1 bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building
event-task-match:event-match-governance-sustainability-2026 rights-governance-decision-gates · event-summit-for-space-sustainability 2bb4abda95b494ccbdb7ed175d9ecd01db3dfdc15176f017c8a9a580f08874b5 1 bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building
opportunity-task-match:opportunity-match-governance-incose rights-governance-decision-gates · opp-incose c8269f07bad646078dc4a4545409851136c749b7ab87a5c4737248557dc32fdc 1 bounded-competence: ecosystem-due-diligence, institution-building

Linked records—not review targets here

These records provide dependency or relationship context. Their decisions belong to their single primary packet, preventing double counting.

  • International Disability Alliance ecosystem-organization:entity-international-disability-alliance · c8f2d92828bc2481ffd2778ae1066294ea2babe057e688286623d02c6c64d17b
  • Native Nations Institute ecosystem-organization:entity-native-nations-institute · 858e04e0d84dbfd5486af6be95291b1eb79416a88b85b6165b74b80cf024921b
  • Summit for Space Sustainability event-occurrence:event-summit-for-space-sustainability · 203d8380e009a128aae8dcfd2219027b6ccdb1ab460c8dfead6c938a6f72faca
  • INCOSE working groups opportunity:opp-incose · 2888d62aafc9cc6f71f875f019d59048067b09988d7a82c612b4d3b486c4653d

Offline packet and worksheet

Downloads contain no reviewer contact details. Downloading does not create an account or store a review response in the GShips application. Ordinary provider request or analytics logs may record the download request. Work locally: the public site has no review account, upload endpoint, or decision-submission API.

Frozen packet · JSON

21.9 KB · packet identity 670be3d54b32efe0…

Download packet

Blank decision worksheet · JSON

5.6 KB · template identity 57282ec29ad6a28f…

Download blank JSON

Review-notes worksheet · Markdown

Readable notes companion only—not a decision-bundle equivalent. Use the closed JSON template for structural validation.

Download notes worksheet

Do not paste a completed decision, identity documents, private contact data, confidential conflict evidence, medical information, controlled material, or exploit details into a public form. Until a separately authorized private handoff exists, retain the completed worksheet locally.

Packet schema · JSON · Decision-bundle schema · JSON

Validate offline

Use Node.js 22.13.0 or later. Keep the packet, worksheet, completed decision, and all six kit files together in a local directory.

  1. Download the six kit files below. Complete a copy of the JSON template offline and preserve its templateFingerprint.
  2. Finalize a separate output file.
    node finalize-review-decision.mjs \
      --input DRAFT.json \
      --output COMPLETED.json

    This marks the copy complete and calculates an unkeyed canonical bundle fingerprint. A fingerprint detects changes; it is not a reviewer signature.

  3. Validate the packet and completed copy.
    node check-review-decisions.mjs \
      --packet PACKET.json \
      --decision COMPLETED.json

    Add another --decision for each independent reviewer.

  4. Interpret the result narrowly. A zero exit proves structural consistency only. Neither command appoints or qualifies a reviewer, establishes independence, accepts a decision, or authorizes publication.

Completion criteria

Every primary record must receive the required number of valid, current-fingerprint approvals; every complementary scope group and required domain must be covered; any unresolved revise, contest, or reject disposition blocks publication.

Named medical, reproductive, nuclear, radiation, cybersecurity, governance, and dual-use conclusions require two distinct qualified independent humans covering complementary domain-method and rights/public-interest scopes.

  • Reviewer identity, qualification, independence, conflicts, and compensation must be assessed by accountable human governance; local validation can only report structural validity.
  • Approve, revise, contest, reject, and recuse remain visible. A negative finding cannot be hidden by an aggregate approval percentage.
  • Revision creates a new record and packet fingerprint. Prior approvals do not carry forward automatically.
  • AI may assist with clerical comparison but cannot count as an independent reviewer, identity attestor, appeal authority, or second person.

Prepared review packet · 0 published human decisions · Independent review pending · Suggest a correction

Accountability record

How to inspect this page

Scope: Prepared review packet tasks:rights-governance-decision-gates · 670be3d54b32efe0fce4288d21211451867573197dbd0662778f229fc43d9df2

Page citations and accountability links

  • Exact frozen packet
    Complete packet payload; SHA-256 670be3d54b32efe0fce4288d21211451867573197dbd0662778f229fc43d9df2 · fingerprint-bound review artifact
  • Blank closed decision template
    Offline structured-decision starting point · unsubmitted local artifact
  • Review-notes worksheet
    Human-readable notes companion; not validator input · offline notes aid
  • Review corpus index
    Corpus SHA-256 8fa944604ca189f5a9216ca59f640ad2ca20972ad512f2f4970764716782e18d · release and ownership index

Assumptions and limits

  • The exact packet, record, source, policy, release, and source-commit fingerprints bound this prepared page; human review has not started.
  • Downloading, local structural validation, or completing notes does not appoint or qualify a reviewer, establish independence, accept a decision, authorize publication, or create a relationship.

What would change this page?

Staffed governance, appointed qualified reviewers, completed record-level decisions, published conflicts, minority findings, corrections, or changed review policy would change this page.

People, review, and conflicts

Prepared by
GShips Project
Editorial status
public-alpha accountability pass
Editorial reviewer
GShips Project AI-assisted editorial synthesis
Last editorial review
2026-07-26
Independent review
pending
Independent reviewer
No independent reviewer assigned
Last independent review
No independent-review date exists
Last content edit
2026-07-25

Declared conflicts

  • The maintainer intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work. No entity, outside funding, customer, sponsor, or indexed-organization relationship currently exists.

Suggest a correction to this page