feat: build step 6 — /process/ and /for-parties/, the first step under D20

Two pages, 14 in dist/ (was 12), zero JavaScript, one <h1> each, no skipped
heading levels. Both were dangling links in SECONDARY_NAV since step 1; the
footer is now whole on every page.

/process/ — the five steps from intake to minutes of settlement or an award,
with PROCESS_FRAMING rendered adjacent to the timings rather than in a section
lede above them, which is the condition Q43 attached to publishing them at all.
Conflicts says WHEN the check runs and WHAT it needs, and then stops: any
sentence naming the outcome would be a seventh conduct undertaking, and §4's
gate requires that Pouya has made it in terms. Logged as Q57.

/for-parties/ — second person, grade 9, for a party arriving without counsel.
NEUTRAL_ROLE_LINE gets its own section above the FAQ rather than a slot in it.
Eight questions in one array feeding both the visible page and the FAQPage node,
so a question cannot reach the structured data without appearing on the page.
The word "lawyer" appears nowhere, deliberately, and the reason is in the file
header.

Three defects worth recording.

The link colour on a dark band measured 1.88:1, and 1.10:1 on hover. `--link`
is documented at 8.95:1 ON CREAM and was never overridden for an inverse
ground; SiteFooter sets its own colour, which is the only reason this had not
fired before — /process/ shipped the site's first body link on a dark band.
That is worse than the gold-on-cream 2.10:1 this project treats as canonical.
Fixed in global.css, where the next inverse-ground link will hit the same hole.
The `:not(.btn)` guard is load-bearing, not tidiness: the new rule's
specificity (0,2,1) beats `.btn-gold`'s (0,2,0), so without it the repair would
have recoloured every gold button on a dark band.

The fee shipped as "with preparation included", which docs/07 forbids in terms:
the allowance is CAPPED, so the unqualified form sells an uncapped one, and
/mediation/ already promises the site does the opposite. `prepIncluded` had
been declared in site.ts with no consumer anywhere.

/process/ §Confidentiality asserted that confidentiality is settled in the
terms of appointment — a claim about Pouya's engagement documents that §4 does
not row and no reader can check. Replaced with ADRIC's Code of Ethics quoted
from the committed extract, plus the §4-verified membership rendered from
MEMBERSHIP_ORGS. The replacement then said "on this it is one sentence", a
completeness claim about a third party's Code that the extract cannot support —
the same file records a separate instrument eighteen lines above. The cited
source supplied its own counter-example.

check:claims failed the build on compliant copy: five uses of "lawyer" about
the READER, which §4 permits since it bars the word used OF Pouya. There is no
allowlist, and the freeze bars narrowing the pattern, so the copy moved — the
same call and the same direction as "my client" to "our client" on /med-arb/.
Both replacements are better than what they replaced.

Q58 opened rather than guessed: docs/07 reads "up to 3.5 h, INCLUDING 2 h
preparation", which makes 3.5 the billed envelope and the room time 1.5 h,
against which 3.5 and 7 being exactly 2x makes no sense. A draft had answered
"What happens on the day?" with "about 3.5 hours" — the envelope presented as
the day, to the reader least able to check it. The sentence was removed.

Two review rounds, 16 findings, all applied. Verified: check 0 errors, lint 0,
build 0 (14 pages), check:claims 0, npm audit 0, minifier tripwire clean.
Lighthouse not run — tool unavailable until build step 7.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Md3GndFqWPzK78xAoebsg5

src/data/schema.ts

@@ -416,25 +416,58 @@ export function practiceAreaGraph(opts: {
 }
 
 /**
- * `/practice/` — the index. **The Person node and nothing else.**
+ * A page that offers no `Service` of its own — the Person node alone.
  *
- * NO `Service` NODES FOR THE SIX AREAS (each page emits its own), NONE FOR THE
- * "also offered" STRIP, AND NO `CollectionPage`. The strip is the constraint to
- * keep: all three are PUBLISHABLE (§4, Q46(a)) but gate 1 on each reads
- * `[Pouya's stated basis]`, not `[verified]`, and ENE is §4's "offering nearest
- * the NOT-NEGOTIABLE boundary" — a visible strip read in context is not the
- * same claim as a machine-readable service type a crawler lifts alone. Adding
- * any of them needs docs/04 changed first, not this file.
+ * `/practice/` and `/process/` are both this shape: they describe how the
+ * practice works rather than offering something a crawler should lift as a
+ * service. `/process/` in particular must NOT emit one — the five timings are
+ * publishable only under Q43's framing sentence, and a `Service` node would
+ * carry the numbers into a field where no framing travels with them.
  *
- * No `BreadcrumbList`: one hop from the root, no visible trail.
+ * No `BreadcrumbList` on either: one hop from the root, no visible trail.
  */
-export function practiceIndexGraph(imageUrl?: string) {
+export function pageGraph(imageUrl?: string) {
   return {
     '@context': 'https://schema.org',
     '@graph': [personNode(imageUrl)],
   };
 }
 
+/** `FAQPage` — built from the array the page renders, never a second copy. */
+function faqNode(path: string, faq: ReadonlyArray<{ q: string; a: string }>) {
+  return {
+    '@type': 'FAQPage',
+    '@id': `${SITE.url}${path}#faq`,
+    mainEntity: faq.map((item) => ({
+      '@type': 'Question',
+      name: item.q,
+      acceptedAnswer: { '@type': 'Answer', text: item.a },
+    })),
+  };
+}
+
+/**
+ * `/for-parties/` — the Person node and a `FAQPage`. **No `Service` node.**
+ *
+ * docs/04 lists `FAQPage` for this page, under the condition that decides it:
+ * *"Only where the visible page genuinely is Q&A. Never fabricate questions to
+ * farm a rich result."* The page is written as questions a party actually asks,
+ * and this node is built from the same array it renders — so a question cannot
+ * enter the structured data without appearing on the page.
+ *
+ * The Service nodes for mediation live on `/mediation/`. This page explains a
+ * process to the party on the other side of it; it is not a second offer of it.
+ */
+export function forPartiesGraph(opts: {
+  faq: ReadonlyArray<{ q: string; a: string }>;
+  imageUrl?: string;
+}) {
+  return {
+    '@context': 'https://schema.org',
+    '@graph': [personNode(opts.imageUrl), faqNode('/for-parties/', opts.faq)],
+  };
+}
+
 /**
  * `/med-arb/`'s graph — the Service, the Person, and a `FAQPage`.
  *
@@ -460,17 +493,6 @@ export function medArbGraph(opts: {
   });
   return {
     ...base,
-    '@graph': [
-      ...base['@graph'],
-      {
-        '@type': 'FAQPage',
-        '@id': `${SITE.url}/med-arb/#faq`,
-        mainEntity: opts.faq.map((item) => ({
-          '@type': 'Question',
-          name: item.q,
-          acceptedAnswer: { '@type': 'Answer', text: item.a },
-        })),
-      },
-    ],
+    '@graph': [...base['@graph'], faqNode('/med-arb/', opts.faq)],
   };
 }

src/data/site.ts

@@ -481,9 +481,18 @@ export const FEES = {
   currency: 'CAD',
   taxNote: 'All fees are plus HST.',
   mediation: {
-    /** Prep is bundled AND stated on the page — [verified 2026-08-26].
-     *  Do not hide it: at these rates, saying preparation is included is the
-     *  point, not a detail. */
+    /** Prep is bundled AND stated IN HOURS on the page — [verified 2026-08-26].
+     *  `docs/07`: *"'including 2 hours of preparation'… Do not quietly fold it
+     *  into the hours figure."* The allowance is CAPPED, so the unqualified
+     *  "preparation included" sells an uncapped one. `/for-parties/` shipped
+     *  that form for one pass and `prepIncluded` had no consumer anywhere.
+     *
+     *  ⚠️ `hours` IS NOT DOCUMENTED AS THE LENGTH OF THE DAY — §9 Q58, OPEN.
+     *  `docs/07`'s card reads "Half day — up to 3.5 h, INCLUDING 2 h
+     *  preparation", which makes 3.5 the billed envelope and the room time
+     *  1.5 h. Against that: 3.5 and 7 are exactly 2×, which they would not be
+     *  if prep sat inside them. One of the two is wrong. **Do not publish this
+     *  number as a duration until Q58 is answered.** */
     halfDay: { amount: 2000, hours: 3.5, prepIncluded: 2 },
     fullDay: { amount: 4000, hours: 7, prepIncluded: 3 },
     additionalParty: 500, // each party beyond two

src/pages/for-parties.astro

@@ -0,0 +1,250 @@
+---
+/**
+ * `/for-parties/` — build step 6. Spec: docs/01 §`/for-parties/`, docs/03 §For
+ * parties. The one page written in the second person, at a grade-9 reading
+ * level, for a party who may be arriving without counsel.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ THIS IS THE PAGE `docs/03` NAMES AS THE PLACE THE BARRED PHRASING FEELS
+ * MOST NATURAL AND IS MOST WRONG. Two forms are struck and must never come
+ * back: *"the mediator is not your lawyer"* — which presupposes lawyer status,
+ * and D13 treats implication as hard as assertion — and *"cannot give you legal
+ * advice"*, a denial of a capacity §4 records as `[unestablished]` and
+ * instructs this repository to answer neither way. `NEUTRAL_ROLE_LINE` is the
+ * ratified pattern: role, then consequence for the reader, no verb of capacity.
+ * It is rendered, never retyped, and it took three attempts and two audits.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ AND THE WORD "LAWYER" DOES NOT APPEAR ON THIS PAGE, DELIBERATELY. §4 bars
+ * it *used of Pouya*, and every natural use here is about the READER — "do I
+ * need my own lawyer", "coming without a lawyer". Those are compliant on §4's
+ * wording and `check:claims` still fails the build on them, because a bare
+ * `\blawyer\b` cannot tell whose. The gate is not wrong: this is the page
+ * `docs/03` names as where the barred phrasing is most tempting, and a broad
+ * pattern is the right shape there. The copy moved instead — "your own legal
+ * advice", which is `NEUTRAL_ROLE_LINE`'s own wording. Same call, and the same
+ * direction, as "my client" → "our client" on `/med-arb/`.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ THE FAQ ARRAY IS THE ONLY SOURCE. It is rendered visibly AND fed to the
+ * `FAQPage` node, because docs/04 allows the node here "only where the visible
+ * page genuinely is Q&A" — so a question cannot reach the structured data
+ * without appearing on the page, and the two cannot drift.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ THE FEE FIGURES ARE INTERPOLATED FROM `FEES`, NOT TYPED. D14's card is one
+ * source; a second hand-typed copy on the page a party reads is the copy that
+ * goes stale, and it goes stale silently.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ AND THE BUNDLED PREPARATION IS STATED IN HOURS, NEVER AS "PREPARATION
+ * INCLUDED". `docs/07` §All parameters confirmed is explicit: *"Preparation time
+ * is bundled and MUST be stated on the page — 'including 2 hours of
+ * preparation'… Do not quietly fold it into the hours figure."* The allowance is
+ * CAPPED, so the unqualified form sells an uncapped one. This page shipped
+ * "with preparation included" for one pass; `adversarial-reviewer` found it, and
+ * `prepIncluded` had been declared in `site.ts` with no consumer anywhere.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ AND THIS PAGE DOES NOT STATE HOW LONG A MEDIATION DAY IS — see §9 Q58.
+ * `docs/07`'s card reads *"Half day — up to 3.5 h, INCLUDING 2 h preparation"*,
+ * which makes 3.5 the billed envelope and the room time 1.5 h. `FEES.mediation
+ * .halfDay.hours` documents neither reading. A draft answered "what happens on
+ * the day" with "about 3.5 hours", which is the envelope presented as the day,
+ * to the reader least able to check it. Do not restore a duration here until
+ * Q58 is answered.
+ */
+import BaseLayout from '../layouts/BaseLayout.astro';
+import Button from '../components/Button.astro';
+import ContactBand from '../components/ContactBand.astro';
+import Eyebrow from '../components/Eyebrow.astro';
+import SectionHeading from '../components/SectionHeading.astro';
+import Undertaking from '../components/Undertaking.astro';
+import { getImage } from 'astro:assets';
+import ogDefault from '../assets/og-portrait.jpg';
+import { forPartiesGraph } from '../data/schema';
+import { CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS, FEES, NEUTRAL_ROLE_LINE } from '../data/site';
+
+const ldImage = await getImage({
+  src: ogDefault,
+  format: 'jpeg',
+  width: 1200,
+  height: 630,
+});
+
+const money = (amount: number) =>
+  new Intl.NumberFormat('en-CA', {
+    style: 'currency',
+    currency: FEES.currency,
+    maximumFractionDigits: 0,
+  }).format(amount);
+
+const FAQ = [
+  {
+    q: 'What is a mediation?',
+    a: 'It is a meeting to try to settle a dispute without a hearing. Everyone involved comes. I run the meeting. I do not decide who is right.',
+  },
+  {
+    q: 'Are you on anyone’s side?',
+    a: 'No. I run the process for everyone in the room at once. If I ran it for one side it would settle nothing, and the other side would be right not to come.',
+  },
+  {
+    q: 'Should I get my own legal advice?',
+    a: 'What you sign at the end of a mediation is an agreement, so it is worth having someone look at your own position before the day rather than after it. If nobody is advising you, say so at the start.',
+  },
+  {
+    q: 'What happens on the day?',
+    a: 'I usually start with everyone in one room. After that the parties often sit separately and I move between them. Some matters run that way from the beginning, with the parties never in the same room. You book either a half day or a full day, and which one you need is settled before the date is fixed.',
+  },
+  {
+    q: 'Does what I say stay private?',
+    a: 'The terms everyone signs at the start deal with confidentiality. A caucus is when I meet one side on their own, without the other side there. One part of what happens in it is mine rather than the document’s:',
+    /* Rendered through <Undertaking> below, not as body prose — §4's third
+       class gets one treatment across the site so a reader can tell a promise
+       from a description. The graph gets lead and promise as one answer. */
+    undertaking: CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS.mediationCaucus,
+  },
+  {
+    q: 'What does it cost, and who pays?',
+    a: `${money(FEES.mediation.halfDay.amount)} for a half day, including ${FEES.mediation.halfDay.prepIncluded} hours of preparation, and ${money(FEES.mediation.fullDay.amount)} for a full day, including ${FEES.mediation.fullDay.prepIncluded} hours. ${FEES.taxNote} ${FEES.terms[0]}`,
+  },
+  {
+    q: 'What if we do not settle?',
+    a: 'Then the mediation ends without an agreement. Nothing you said becomes a ruling, because I do not make one. What gets written down is only what everyone agrees to write down.',
+  },
+  {
+    q: 'How do I get ready?',
+    a: 'Bring the documents that matter, not all of them. Know the number you would accept and the number you would walk away at. Bring someone who can agree to a settlement on the day, or be able to reach them quickly. Expect to be asked what the weakest part of your own case is.',
+  },
+];
+
+/* ONE SOURCE, TWO SHAPES. The page renders the lead-in and the undertaking as
+   separate elements; a `FAQPage` answer is plain text, so the node gets them
+   joined. Neither is typed twice. */
+const graph = forPartiesGraph({
+  faq: FAQ.map(({ q, a, undertaking }) => ({
+    q,
+    a: undertaking ? `${a} ${undertaking}` : a,
+  })),
+  imageUrl: new URL(ldImage.src, Astro.site).href,
+});
+---
+
+<BaseLayout
+  title="For Parties · What Happens at a Mediation · Pouya Lajevardi"
+  description="What happens at a mediation, in plain language: who the mediator is, what the day looks like, what it costs and who pays, and how to get ready."
+  jsonLd={graph}
+>
+  {/* ---- 1. Hero -------------------------------------------------------- */}
+  <section class="section hero">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <Eyebrow dot>For parties</Eyebrow>
+      <h1 class="display hero-h">What happens at a mediation.</h1>
+      <p class="hero-lede">
+        This page is for you if you are going to a mediation and nobody has
+        explained what one is. It is the same day the rest of this site
+        describes, written without the shorthand.
+      </p>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  {/* ---- 2. The role, before anything else ------------------------------ */}
+  {
+    /* NEUTRAL_ROLE_LINE gets its own section rather than a slot in the FAQ.
+      docs/03 requires this page to say it explicitly, and the sentence a party
+      most needs is not one to make them scroll for. */
+  }
+  <section class="section section-alt reveal">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <div class="section-head">
+        <SectionHeading eyebrow="First" level={2}>
+          <span slot="heading">Who I am in the room.</span>
+        </SectionHeading>
+      </div>
+      <div class="prose">
+        <p class="statement">{NEUTRAL_ROLE_LINE}</p>
+        <p>
+          I also do not decide who is right. There is no ruling at the end of a
+          mediation. There is either an agreement everyone signs, or there is
+          not one.
+        </p>
+      </div>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  {/* ---- 3. The questions ----------------------------------------------- */}
+  <section class="section reveal">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <div class="section-head">
+        <SectionHeading
+          eyebrow="Questions"
+          level={2}
+          lede="The ones parties ask most often, answered plainly."
+        >
+          <span slot="heading">What you probably want to know.</span>
+        </SectionHeading>
+      </div>
+      <div class="faq">
+        {
+          FAQ.map((item) => (
+            <div class="faq-item">
+              <h3 class="faq-q">{item.q}</h3>
+              <p class="faq-a">{item.a}</p>
+              {item.undertaking && (
+                <Undertaking>{item.undertaking}</Undertaking>
+              )}
+            </div>
+          ))
+        }
+      </div>
+      <div class="cta">
+        <Button href="/fees/" variant="gold">The full rate card &rarr;</Button>
+        <Button href="/process/" variant="ghost">The five steps &rarr;</Button>
+      </div>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  <ContactBand />
+</BaseLayout>
+
+<style>
+  .hero {
+    padding-block-start: var(--space-9);
+  }
+  .hero-h {
+    margin-block: var(--space-4) var(--space-5);
+    font-size: var(--text-6xl);
+  }
+  .hero-lede {
+    max-inline-size: 58ch;
+    font-size: var(--text-lg);
+    line-height: var(--leading-body);
+    color: var(--text-secondary);
+  }
+
+  /* The compliance sentence, set larger than the paragraph under it. A party
+     who reads one line on this page should read this one. */
+  .statement {
+    font-size: var(--text-lg);
+    line-height: var(--leading-body);
+  }
+
+  .faq {
+    display: grid;
+    gap: var(--space-7);
+    max-inline-size: var(--width-prose);
+  }
+  .faq-q {
+    margin-block-end: var(--space-2);
+    font-family: var(--font-serif);
+    font-size: var(--text-xl);
+    line-height: var(--leading-tight);
+  }
+  .faq-a {
+    line-height: var(--leading-body);
+    color: var(--text-secondary);
+  }
+
+  /* A row of standalone CTAs, not prose: WCAG 2.5.8's inline-link exception
+     does not cover them, so `.btn` carries the 44px target. */
+  .cta {
+    display: flex;
+    flex-wrap: wrap;
+    gap: var(--space-3) var(--space-4);
+    margin-block-start: var(--space-8);
+  }
+</style>

src/pages/practice.astro

@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ import PracticeCard from '../components/PracticeCard.astro';
 import SectionHeading from '../components/SectionHeading.astro';
 import { getImage } from 'astro:assets';
 import ogDefault from '../assets/og-portrait.jpg';
-import { practiceIndexGraph } from '../data/schema';
+import { pageGraph } from '../data/schema';
 import { NEUTRAL_ROLE_LINE, PRACTICE_AREAS } from '../data/site';
 
 const ldImage = await getImage({
@@ -46,7 +46,18 @@ const ldImage = await getImage({
   width: 1200,
   height: 630,
 });
-const graph = practiceIndexGraph(new URL(ldImage.src, Astro.site).href);
+/* THE PERSON NODE AND NOTHING ELSE, and the reason is about this page rather
+   than about graph shape — which is why it lives here now and not in
+   `schema.ts`. NO `Service` NODES FOR THE SIX AREAS (each area page emits its
+   own), NONE FOR THE "also offered" STRIP, AND NO `CollectionPage`. The strip
+   is the constraint to keep: all three are PUBLISHABLE (§4, Q46(a)) but gate 1
+   on each reads `[Pouya's stated basis]`, not `[verified]`, and ENE is §4's
+   "offering nearest the NOT-NEGOTIABLE boundary" — a visible strip read in
+   context is not the same claim as a machine-readable service type a crawler
+   lifts alone. Adding any of them needs docs/04 changed first.
+
+   No `BreadcrumbList`: one hop from the root, no visible trail. */
+const graph = pageGraph(new URL(ldImage.src, Astro.site).href);
 
 /* THREE, NOT FOUR. Each has a §4 Offerings row reading PUBLISHABLE (Q46(a),
    2026-08-28). Do not add a fourth without a row, and do not restore the one

src/pages/process.astro

@@ -0,0 +1,248 @@
+---
+/**
+ * `/process/` — build step 6. Spec: docs/01 §`/process/`, docs/03 §Process.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ `PROCESS_FRAMING` IS THE CONDITION ON WHICH THE FIVE TIMINGS MAY BE
+ * PUBLISHED AT ALL — Q43, Pouya 2026-08-27 — and it renders ADJACENT TO THE
+ * NUMBERS, never in the section lede above them: a reader who scans the strip
+ * and skips the lede has read a commitment. `/` renders the same constant under
+ * the same steps, so neither page can drift from the other.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ THE TWO UNDERTAKINGS HERE ARE RENDERED, NEVER RETYPED — §4's conduct
+ * class, Q54. Softening one is a change to a published commitment, not a copy
+ * edit, and nothing in a build fails when a promise gets smaller.
+ *
+ * ⚠️ AND NOTHING ON THIS PAGE MAY ADD A SEVENTH. §4's gate: an undertaking is
+ * publishable only where Pouya has made it **in terms** — not "would obviously
+ * agree to", not "follows from the process". That is why §Conflicts says when
+ * the check happens and what it needs, and then stops. See the TODO below.
+ */
+import BaseLayout from '../layouts/BaseLayout.astro';
+import Button from '../components/Button.astro';
+import ContactBand from '../components/ContactBand.astro';
+import Eyebrow from '../components/Eyebrow.astro';
+import ProcessStep from '../components/ProcessStep.astro';
+import SectionHeading from '../components/SectionHeading.astro';
+import Undertaking from '../components/Undertaking.astro';
+import { getImage } from 'astro:assets';
+import ogDefault from '../assets/og-portrait.jpg';
+import { pageGraph } from '../data/schema';
+import {
+  CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS,
+  MEMBERSHIP_ORGS,
+  PROCESS,
+  PROCESS_FRAMING,
+} from '../data/site';
+
+const ldImage = await getImage({
+  src: ogDefault,
+  format: 'jpeg',
+  width: 1200,
+  height: 630,
+});
+const graph = pageGraph(new URL(ldImage.src, Astro.site).href);
+---
+
+<BaseLayout
+  title="The Shape of an Engagement · Pouya Lajevardi · Toronto"
+  description="The five steps from the intake call to minutes of settlement or an award: timing, conflicts, confidentiality, and what happens if a matter does not settle."
+  jsonLd={graph}
+>
+  {/* ---- 1. Hero -------------------------------------------------------- */}
+  <section class="section hero">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <Eyebrow dot>Process</Eyebrow>
+      <h1 class="display hero-h">The shape of an engagement.</h1>
+      <p class="hero-lede">
+        Booking a neutral commits a client to a date, a cost and a process. This
+        is the whole of it: the five steps, what each one needs from the
+        parties, and what happens if the matter does not settle.
+      </p>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  {/* ---- 2. The five steps ---------------------------------------------- */}
+  <section class="section section-alt reveal">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <div class="section-head">
+        <SectionHeading
+          eyebrow="Step by step"
+          level={2}
+          lede="Intake to conclusion, with the timing each step usually takes."
+        >
+          <span slot="heading">Five steps.</span>
+        </SectionHeading>
+      </div>
+
+      <ol class="steps" role="list">
+        {
+          PROCESS.map((step, i) => (
+            <ProcessStep n={i + 1} title={step.title} timing={step.timing}>
+              {step.body}
+            </ProcessStep>
+          ))
+        }
+      </ol>
+
+      {
+        /* Q43, and it is not a disclaimer: it is the condition on which the
+          numbers above may appear. Directly under them, never in the lede. */
+      }
+      <p class="process-framing">{PROCESS_FRAMING}</p>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  {/* ---- 3. Conflicts --------------------------------------------------- */}
+  {
+    /* TODO(pouya): what happens when a conflicts check turns something up? Any
+      sentence naming the outcome is a SEVENTH conduct undertaking, and §4's
+      gate requires that you have made it in terms — so it is not written here.
+      AGENTS.md §9 Q57. */
+  }
+  <section class="section reveal">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <div class="section-head">
+        <SectionHeading eyebrow="Conflicts" level={2}>
+          <span slot="heading">Checked at step one.</span>
+        </SectionHeading>
+      </div>
+      <div class="prose">
+        <p>
+          Conflicts are run on the intake call, before anything is agreed. The
+          check needs the full legal name of every party, the parent or
+          affiliate actually behind the dispute where that is a different
+          entity, and the names of counsel on each side.
+        </p>
+        <p>
+          Send those with the request rather than at the call. An intake call
+          that stops to collect names is an intake call that gets repeated.
+        </p>
+      </div>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  {/* ---- 4. Confidentiality --------------------------------------------- */}
+  <section class="section section-inverse reveal">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <div class="section-head">
+        <SectionHeading eyebrow="Confidentiality" level={2}>
+          <span slot="heading">What stays in the room.</span>
+        </SectionHeading>
+      </div>
+      <div class="prose">
+        {
+          /* SOURCED, NOT ASSERTED. An earlier draft read "confidentiality is
+            settled in the terms of appointment at step two" — a claim about
+            what MY engagement documents contain, which §4 does not row and
+            which no reader could check. What replaced it is a quotation from an
+            artefact committed to this repository
+            (`docs/reference/adr-institution-names.md`, retrieved 2026-08-29,
+            with its URL) plus a membership §4 verifies.
+
+            AND THE SENTENCE AROUND THE QUOTE STAYS INSIDE IT — the gloss lens,
+            which caught a second draft here. It read "on this it is ONE
+            SENTENCE", a completeness claim about a third party's Code that the
+            extract cannot support: the extract is a scrape of one web page
+            carrying three quoted lines, and eighteen lines above it records a
+            SEPARATE instrument — ADRIC's Code of Conduct for Mediators — that
+            bears on the same subject. The artefact cited as the source supplied
+            the counter-example. Same shape as the LAT ellipsis and the IESO
+            "connection allocation". It now says only "it says".
+
+            The Code establishes an obligation on members. It does NOT establish
+            what my appointment terms say, what any rule set provides, or that
+            the undertaking below is required by it. That undertaking is
+            introduced as mine, which is what it is.
+
+            THE MEMBERSHIP IS RENDERED FROM `MEMBERSHIP_ORGS`, not typed. R10's
+            re-confirm trigger sweeps the constants; a hand-typed copy here
+            would keep asserting the membership after a lapse, which is the OCNI
+            shape R10 was written from. */
+        }
+        <p>
+          I am a member of the {MEMBERSHIP_ORGS[0]}. Its <a
+            href="https://adric.ca/rules-codes/code-of-ethics/"
+            >Code of Ethics</a
+          > applies to every member, and it says: <q
+            >A Member shall be faithful to the relationship of trust and
+            confidentiality inherent in the office of arbitrator or mediator.</q
+          >
+        </p>
+        <p>That is the obligation. This is mine, in a mediation:</p>
+      </div>
+      <Undertaking>{CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS.mediationCaucus}</Undertaking>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  {/* ---- 5. If it does not settle --------------------------------------- */}
+  <section class="section section-alt reveal">
+    <div class="wrap">
+      <div class="section-head">
+        <SectionHeading
+          eyebrow="The other outcome"
+          level={2}
+          lede="The question counsel ask before committing a client's day."
+        >
+          <span slot="heading">If it does not settle.</span>
+        </SectionHeading>
+      </div>
+      <div class="prose">
+        <p>
+          Then it does not settle, and that is an outcome the day is built to
+          reach cleanly rather than a failure of it. What gets recorded is what
+          the parties agree to record — the issues that closed and the ones that
+          did not. A matter narrowed to two questions is worth having even when
+          it is not what you came for.
+        </p>
+        <p>
+          Where parties want a binding end if the mediation does not produce
+          one, that is med-arb — and it is agreed at the start rather than
+          reached for at the end:
+        </p>
+      </div>
+      <Undertaking>{CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS.medArbSwitch}</Undertaking>
+      <div class="cta">
+        <Button href="/med-arb/" variant="gold">How med-arb runs &rarr;</Button>
+      </div>
+    </div>
+  </section>
+
+  <ContactBand />
+</BaseLayout>
+
+<style>
+  .hero {
+    padding-block-start: var(--space-9);
+  }
+  .hero-h {
+    margin-block: var(--space-4) var(--space-5);
+    font-size: var(--text-6xl);
+  }
+  .hero-lede {
+    max-inline-size: 58ch;
+    font-size: var(--text-lg);
+    line-height: var(--leading-body);
+    color: var(--text-secondary);
+  }
+
+  /* ONE PER ROW, unlike `/`'s compressed strip. This page is the full account,
+     so each step gets the width to be read rather than scanned. */
+  .steps {
+    display: grid;
+    gap: var(--space-6);
+    margin: 0;
+  }
+
+  /* Same treatment as `/`, deliberately: one condition, one look, so a reader
+     who has seen it on the home page recognises it here. */
+  .process-framing {
+    margin-block-start: var(--space-6);
+    max-inline-size: var(--width-prose);
+    font-size: var(--text-sm);
+    color: var(--text-secondary);
+  }
+
+  .cta {
+    margin-block-start: var(--space-7);
+  }
+</style>

src/styles/global.css

@@ -391,6 +391,23 @@ a:hover {
 .section-accent :focus-visible {
   outline-color: var(--gold-l);
 }
+/* AND THE LINK COLOUR, for the same reason and measured the same way. `--link`
+   is --maroon-l, documented at 8.95:1 ON CREAM and never overridden for an
+   inverse ground: on --ink it measures 1.88:1, and :hover (--maroon-d) 1.10:1.
+   That is WORSE than the gold-on-cream 2.10:1 this project treats as the defect
+   that must never ship. `SiteFooter` sets its own `.footer-col a` colour, which
+   is the only reason this had not fired before — `/process/` shipped the site's
+   first body link on a dark band. Values: gold-l 11.09:1 on ink, cream 16.81:1.
+   Here rather than in the page, because the next inverse-ground link hits the
+   same hole. Found by `adversarial-reviewer`, 2026-08-30. */
+.section-inverse a:not(.btn),
+.section-accent a:not(.btn) {
+  color: var(--text-inverse-2);
+}
+.section-inverse a:not(.btn):hover,
+.section-accent a:not(.btn):hover {
+  color: var(--text-inverse);
+}
 /* The eyebrow's dot is a --accent (maroon) box, so recolouring only the TEXT
    for an inverse ground leaves the dot at 1.21:1 on ink and 1.00:1 on the
    accent band — present in the markup, invisible on the page. Colour never