MQ-010 ★ EW-counter-reset + persona-rotation discipline LOCKED 2026-05-18T20:30 BST

Lock summary

  • Locked pick: Axis-1 β HARD-RESET-AT-NEW-MODULE-FIRST-Q + Axis-2 δ DOMAIN-MAPPING + 5-Q-WINDOW-ROTATION-AUDIT
  • Amendment: A-192; arch-state v3.86 → v3.87
  • Triggering context: Q-040 (Q-T4) Option F commissioning per Rich-confirmation 2026-05-18T20:10 BST
  • FIFTH meta-Q in 24h-plus cluster (MQ-006 + MQ-007 + MQ-008 + MQ-009 + MQ-010); validates MQ-008 META-Q PATTERN OBSERVATION (~1 meta-Q per 3-5 substantive Q-locks; 5th consecutive iteration)
  • No substantive Q blocked — convention codifies existing emergent patterns + makes implicit rules explicit; backwards-compatible Day-1
  • Phase-3 axis stays 15/30-45 substantive (MQ-010 separately counted as 5th meta-Q)

Axis-1 β HARD-RESET-AT-NEW-MODULE-FIRST-Q

Rule

  1. EW-4 counter resets to 0 at first substantive Q whose module differs from prior Q’s module
  2. Reset event recorded in TWO places — new Q’s §11 L5 EW evaluation section + arch-state lastmod-prose at new Q’s lock-cascade
  3. EW-1/EW-2/EW-3/EW-5 are per-Q evaluation counters (NOT consecutive-counters); no reset rule applies
  4. Module-close Q (e.g., Q-040 closing Trusts at 4/3-5) does NOT trigger reset — reset happens at NEXT-MODULE’S FIRST Q (e.g., Q-A1 Q-041 Assets)
  5. Cross-module-primitives Q-CM-N do NOT trigger reset (separate accounting)
  6. Phase-boundary reset inherits module-boundary reset trivially

Empirical precedent

EW-4 counter trajectory across Trusts module — Q-037 (1) + Q-038 (2) + Q-039 (3) + Q-040 (4). Reset point at Q-A1 (Assets; Q-041) is FIRST APPLICATION of Axis-1 β.

Why β over α/γ/δ/ε

  • α (no reset) — EW-4 fires spuriously across structurally different modules
  • β (RECOMMENDED) — natural reset; substrate-texture-aware; minimal complexity
  • γ (reset-at-module-close) — module-close Q is itself same-module bold-synthesis; should remain counted
  • δ (reset ALL EW counters) — overkill; per-Q properties don’t need reset
  • ε (phase-boundary only) — module-boundary more granular + natural trigger

Axis-2 δ DOMAIN-MAPPING + 5-Q-WINDOW-ROTATION-AUDIT

10-persona roster

IDNameTypeDomain
P-01OpenInherit coreFR+ICCatala + CORE-protocol
P-04OASIS + Charity CommissionICStandards engagement
P-07MishconFRStatutory interpretation + common-law
P-08LawskyFRFormalisation (Hudson §3.5/§10; Hastings-Bass)
P-09HMRCICIHT branching (ITPA-2014; IHTA 1984; FA 2006)
P-10Berenbrokc-foldSwiss-law (ZGB / Stiftung / Hague 1985)
P-FR-FAITH-01ShariaFRIslamic (waqf + faraid + mawqufun-alayhi)
P-FR-FAITH-02HinduFRHindu (HUF + coparcener)
P-FR-FAITH-03JewishFRHalachic
P-FR-FAITH-04Singapore-Muslim MUISFRSingapore-Muslim

Domain-mapping (Day-1 engagement defaults)

  • Tax-IHT slot/rule → P-09 HMRC ALWAYS ENGAGE
  • Statutory section UK&W → P-07 Mishcon ALWAYS ENGAGE
  • Catala formalisation candidate → P-08 Lawsky ENGAGE when decomposable-rule structure
  • Faith-tradition slot/rule → P-FR-FAITH-{01..04} ENGAGE matching pillar
  • Standards-body engagement → P-04 OASIS ENGAGE
  • Swiss-jurisdiction substrate → P-10 Berenbrok ENGAGE
  • CORE protocol mechanic → P-01 OpenInherit ALWAYS ENGAGE

5-Q-window rotation-audit

Every 5 substantive Q-locks (Q-035, Q-040, Q-045, Q-050, …) — count distinct personas engaged; <5 distinct in window fires retrospective Q1 candidate FLAG (NOT halt; NOT blocker). Empirical not categorical — substrate genuinely may not need all 10 personas.

Persona roster evolution

New domain (e.g., EU Succession Regulation / Scotland Land Reform / Crypto-asset succession / AI-trust governance) → commission persona-addition via meta-Q or in-Q sub_clarification. Do NOT improvise per-Q.

Empirical precedent

  • P-08 Lawsky surfaced via Q-037 retrospective Q1 (mid-cycle uplift; Rich-time cost)
  • P-09 HMRC surfaced via Q-040 substrate ITPA-2014 IHT branching (Q-T4 narrowly avoided missing it)
  • P-10 Berenbrok surfaced via Q-037 Hague 1985 Swiss-no-native-trust substrate-correcting finding
  • Pattern — domain-driven surfacing happens but UNRELIABLY; codification ensures defaults Day-1

Why MQ-010 now (Option F selected on Q-040 closing-question)

  • (a) MQ-010 deferred from Q-039 — surfacing now keeps meta-Q cadence healthy
  • (b) Q-A1 Assets entry next is the natural EW-4 reset point — codifying rule before applying it prevents ad-hoc invention
  • (c) Persona-rotation has been ad-hoc — codifying when-which-persona avoids future drift

Deferred from MQ-010

100% RC1-RC7 quality-target codification — DEFERRED to MQ-011+ candidate. Rationale — current 97% pattern consistent + acceptable; codifying 100% without empirical-feasibility-evidence would over-constrain; deferral allows natural surfacing if substrate proves 100% feasible.

Phase-1.5+ richard-task generated

1 NEW task — task-39 author/update persona-roster reference doc v2.0+ at peer-reviewer-personas.md (existing v1.0 from 2026-05-17 extends with MQ-010 codified structure: 10 personas + domain-mapping rows + 5-Q-window rotation-audit protocol).

EW counters NOT incremented for meta-Q

  • EW-1 (3-consecutive-zero-c-objections) — MQ-010 has 0 c-objections (no persona-pass formally needed for methodology-codification)
  • EW-4 (5-consecutive bold-synthesis) — MQ-010 codifies existing pattern (NOT bold-synthesis)
  • All EW counters stable; no fires

NEXT

  • Q-A1 Assets entry (Q-041) — FIRST APPLICATION of Axis-1 β EW-4 RESET at module-boundary + FIRST application of Axis-2 δ domain-mapping defaults Day-1; L2 inheritance from Q-CM-1 + Q-037 + Q-029 + Q-035; estimated cycle ~2-3h
  • Phase-1.5+ task-39 — author/update persona-roster reference doc v2.0+
  • Q-045 (5-Q window Q-041..Q-045) — FIRST 5-Q-window rotation-audit checkpoint
  • MQ-011 commissioning — DEFERRED; surfaces on natural cadence per META-Q PATTERN OBSERVATION (100% RC1-RC7 + substrate-thinness escalation candidates)

Commit

MQ-010 ★ EW-counter-reset-at-module-boundary + persona-rotation-discipline LOCKED — A-192 + arch-state v3.86 → v3.87 + Axis-1 β + Axis-2 δ