fix(jury): adjudication consent gate + reviewer no-show pause#98
Merged
Conversation
theailab-org
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Implements the two documented-but-unenforced eligibility gates found during the user-journey doc fact-checks (issues registry #71/#72). Stacked on #97 (includes its commit until it merges).
Commit 1 — adjudication consent gate (
selectJury/selectExperts)Both journey docs (JUROR.md, EXPERT.md) describe the "I want to help adjudicate" toggle as gating panel seats — "same toggle as Juror." In code,
reviewer_consentwas enforced only for reviewer selection; jurors and experts were drafted from every personal identity above the score floor, then charged the −1 no-commit penalty for ignoring summonses they never agreed to receive.trueor legacy1)insufficient: truerather than drafting anyoneCommit 2 — reviewer no-show pause
REVIEWER.md claims "your no-show count goes up and can pause your assignments" — no counter or consequence existed; a reviewer could ignore every assignment forever, burning a 48h SLA per flagged content.
getReviewerNoShowCount: pure read over DAG history —RECUSEDreviews withdecision_note = sla_expired(node-signed auto-recusals) within the lastNOSHOW_SAMPLE_SIZEresolved assignments. Manual recusals and still-open assignments never count. No new state.MAX_NOSHOW_RECUSALS(3) within the window (10) ⇒ paused. Hard filter — relaxing would re-assign the case to someone already ignoring assignments."sla_expired"literal (written by the trigger, now matched by selection) is promoted toRECUSAL_REASONS.SLA_EXPIREDin shared/constants so the two sites can't drift.max_noshow_recusals/noshow_sample_size(selection must agree across nodes) ⇒ genesis payload changed ⇒npm run seedre-run regeneratedGENESIS_TX_SIGNATURE/GENESIS_VP_TX_SIGNATUREand genesis-data artifacts per the documented procedure.Selection is deterministically replayed by every node; nodes on different versions would seat different panels for the same dispute. Additionally the genesis-constants change means a new genesis hash — fine for dev clusters (reset by convention), but this and #97 should deploy in one coordinated window.
Operational note: from this version, adjudication requires opt-in — pilot/seed users must have
reviewer_consentset or jury selection will (correctly) return insufficient.Test plan
tests/jury-consent.test.js(4) + no-show describe intests/reviewer-selection.test.js(5)