External review intake · generated 2026-05-19T17:53:44Z

Give this to a reviewer. Do not send it as leverage.

Turn the missing external-review proof into a reviewer-ready worksheet without sending outreach or claiming validation.

Status: Ready for reviewer
Records: 0 external records
Outcome: Application receipt only
Gate: No outbound before 2026-05-26

Reviewer task

Open, read, record

01Role reviewDecide whether the proof route deserves attention and name the one-sentence read.Open 02Brutal scorecardState why the current proof is not 10/10 and what evidence would change the score.Open 03Route auditCheck whether the public route is short, current, non-confusing, and honest about the missing review record.Open 04Route indexUse the route index only after the short path if more context is needed.Open 05Source-to-answer indexRecover exact source links for likely reviewer questions instead of relying on the route narrative.Open 06Launch readinessSeparate public proof-lab readiness from blocked legal, commercial, customer, and revenue claims.Open 07Proof ledgerCite the public-safe hash-chain and progress graph mechanism instead of trusting the narrative.Open 08Validation harnessCompare the completed record against the existing feedback classification protocol.Open 09GitHub issue formIf feedback exists, use the inbound issue form as the public-safe record slot.Open

Blank record

Copy this shape only after review

Public projection: https://dicnunz.github.io/ciw-external-review-intake/records.json. It is intentionally empty until classified feedback exists.

{
  "allowed_next_action": "",
  "blocked_next_action": "No outbound, no OpenAI-side outcome claim, and no affiliation claim.",
  "classification": "usable_non_target_feedback|ambiguous_feedback|target_owned_signal",
  "forbidden_claims_named": [],
  "one_sentence_read": "",
  "proof_mechanism_cited": "",
  "remaining_confusion": [],
  "reviewer_class": "non_nic_reviewer|target_company_owned_signal|unknown",
  "role_fit_read": "",
  "route_opened": []
}

Classifier

Feedback is not outcome

usable-non-target-feedback	A non-Nic reviewer understood the public proof route, named the limits, and produced public-safe feedback.	Record the feedback, repair confusion, and keep outbound blocked unless a later gate opens.	No outbound, no OpenAI-side outcome claim, and no affiliation claim.
ambiguous-feedback	The feedback is too vague, confused, private, or overclaimed to improve reviewer proof.	Record the ambiguity as a route-repair issue and tighten the public path.	No outbound, no score lift, no outcome claim, and no affiliation claim.
target-owned-signal	The reviewer source appears to be OpenAI-owned or target-company-owned and must route through the signal router first.	Stop, classify through the inbound signal router, and refresh the outcome watch before reply.	No outbound, no outcome claim, and no affiliation claim until source ownership and next step are verified.

Acceptance

What makes a record usable

Route openedThe reviewer names which public URLs were opened and can recover the route without private context.
One-sentence readThe reviewer states what CIW is in one sentence without clone, official, affiliation, or employment language.
Claim boundaryThe reviewer explicitly names blocked claims: no target-side outcome, no legal company, no customers, no affiliation.
Proof mechanismThe reviewer cites the hash-chain, graph, tests, route audit, or source repo as the proof mechanism.
Source recoveryThe reviewer can use the source-to-answer index to trace at least one claim to a public source.
Launch boundaryThe reviewer separates public proof-lab readiness from legal/commercial company launch.
Remaining confusionThe reviewer names at least one remaining question or explicitly says the route is clear.
Classification chosenThe record chooses usable_non_target_feedback, ambiguous_feedback, or target_owned_signal before next action.

Hard stops

What stays blocked

No outbound before 2026-05-26 unless a verified real reply or explicit fresh override changes the route.
External reviewer feedback is not OpenAI-side outcome evidence unless a separate target-company-owned source is verified.
No OpenAI affiliation, employment, endorsement, customer, legal, payment, or company-formation claim.
No private data, email address, raw message text, local path, credential, account data, or customer material in public records.
A blank intake record cannot raise the score; only classified public-safe feedback can repair the external-review gap.