mirror of
https://github.com/vitorpamplona/amethyst.git
synced 2026-08-11 08:47:33 +00:00
Vitor PamplonaandClaude Opus 4.8
ea6762b137
Correcting the previous commit's reasoning. It concluded from the two implementations that CORD-04 does not rank-gate the Banlist and that enforcing it would be a unilateral divergence. Reading the actual spec (github.com/concord-protocol/concord, not in the Armada repo) shows the opposite: §3 is normative and binds "every action" — "the actor must hold the required bit and strictly outrank its target — equal cannot act on equal (an admin cannot ban a peer admin)" — and §5 step 3 restates it. Banning is the example the rule itself picks. Only §4, the section defining the Banlist, states the bit half alone. Both independent implementations read §4 in isolation and made the same mistake, which is evidence about the section rather than about the readers. So the fold fix is spec-mandated. It remains consensus-affecting (we would ignore bans Armada honors until they ship), so it wants coordination rather than a race, and the fold is still unchanged here. Adds docs/concord-banlist-rank-conformance.md to share upstream: verbatim spec citations, both implementations' gates, a delta-based rule that makes the per-target requirement expressible against a whole-list entity, and two further reproduced findings — a banned BAN-holder can lift their own ban (so bans do not stick against any BAN holder), and a forked ban survives an unban that does not chain onto it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>