thePR0M3TH3AN
2beb7a7bb5
Proves the engine did not stay video-specific during extraction. - application adapter contract in core (createApplicationAdapter, evaluateObject, collectTargets): an object names the targets that govern it and the strictest verdict reaching any of them wins, so denying a seller takes their whole catalogue down with no cascade logic in the application - examples/commerce: a marketplace on the public API covering all ten proof-of-fit behaviors the plan requires, including that no core change was needed. One product, one snapshot, four surfaces, four different verdicts. - README, integration guide, per-example README, CHANGELOG, four ADRs, and GPL-3.0-or-later LICENSE (the license was listed in Phase 1 but missing) - checkpoints rewritten to reflect actual state and to say plainly which migration-plan phases belong to the consumer repos rather than here Fixes a real gap found by the proof-of-fit: composeDecisions kept only the first decision's evidence, so an object governed by several targets lost the evidence that drove its verdict. Evidence now merges — counts summed, contributor lists unioned, flags or-ed. 556 tests; lint, typecheck, and per-package type build clean.
1.4 KiB
ADR 0003 — The engine carries no thresholds
Status: accepted
Context
The extraction started from one application's numbers: blur at 3 trusted reports, hide at 20 trusted mutes, a 60-day mute window. Those were nearly promoted into the core as defaults, which would have made every future consumer inherit a video application's editorial judgement.
Decision
The core defines the vocabulary — target types, capabilities, effect ladders,
reason identifiers, aggregation and precedence rules — and no thresholds.
Applications supply a PolicyDefinition of named profiles with category
thresholds. The characterized reference values live in
@nostr-governance/bitvid-compat as one application's profile.
NEUTRAL_POLICY is the fallback: it enforces administrative denial and applies
no trust thresholds, so the generic engine never hides content merely because
one trusted account acted against it.
Consequences
A new consumer writes a policy instead of arguing with a default. The commerce example needed no core change, which is the test this decision has to pass.
An application that supplies no policy gets very little enforcement. That is deliberate: silently applying someone else's moderation thresholds is worse than applying none, because the operator would not know it was happening.
Threshold 0 means "gate disabled" rather than "fires on everything", so
zeroing a value is a safe way to switch a gate off.