feat: apply six rulings; close Q22/Q44/Q45/Q46(b)/Q47; revert Q47's two graph fields

Pouya's rulings: Q44 (memberships current — ship the group), Q45 (PDF bio
deferred to step 9), Q46(a) (three offerings pass all gates), Q46(b) (§11
ratified as the source for definitional expansions, conditional on committing
the source), Q47 (set jobTitle and worksFor), the legal-advice formulation
ratified without change, and Q22 closed on his own execution evidence.

Q46(b): docs/reference/adrio-designations.md commits all five ADRIO expansions
with reproducible sha256 (four fetches each; both review agents independently
reproduced every digest). It immediately caught the error Pouya raised in the
same message — §11 had said "Chartered Mediator-Arbitrator" since the file was
created, ADRIO's term is "Chartered Med-Arbitrator", and the wrong form was in
dist/about/index.html. Four prior review passes read that string and checked
only whether it was sourced, not whether it was right.

Q47 REVERTED after both review agents struck it independently. jobTitle shipped
for one pass as "Mediator and Commercial Arbitrator" — the string claims-auditor
had removed from this same node's description the previous day, since §4 has no
row for a completed arbitration. The implementation flagged the wrong defect: it
argued about scoping and missed that the whole string was already struck. worksFor
was reverted because ProfessionalService.provider is this Person, so
provider -> Person -> worksFor asserts a same-entity claim transitively. Now
jobTitle: 'Mediator', no worksFor. Q49 asks for the two §4 rows.

Q44: memberships render with NO currency warranty (his condition), and R10 is
re-armed with an event trigger rather than a date since he declined renewal-date
tracking. Q22: §7 goes to PROVISIONED; R17 carries the first rotation date,
2026-11-26. New CLAUDE.md convention, his: never suppress stderr in a
verification script — suppression turns "it failed" into "it found nothing".

Two review rounds resolved 48 findings; the majority of the second round were
defects in the first round's fixes, including a re-widening of §4's renewal
period inside the comment that corrects that widening, a cited guard in
schema.ts that does not exist, and a struck §9 row describing a reverted state.
Three findings were one lift from a public page: docs/03's /for-parties/
directive breached D13 twice, docs/01 told an implementer an unpublishable strip
could ship, and docs/07 priced three ungated offerings with no gate note.

Also commits docs/reference/adrio-extract/ — the extraction script and its five
outputs, since the digests covered raw HTML and said nothing about the text the
term counts were run against. The equivalent gap for Q22's IAM verification is
NOT closed and is Q52.

Verified: astro check 0/0/0, eslint + prettier clean, build 2 pages, 0 .js
emitted, minifier guard silent, animation-timeline intact, no currency-warranty
phrasing in dist, JSON-LD correct on both pages.
NOT run: Lighthouse (tool unavailable until step 7, R11); HTML validator.

Opens Q48-Q53. Live reminders: R1, R10, R11, R13, R14, R15, R16, R17.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0148NztQskLKKApP5SzAA78e

docs/01-architecture.md

@@ -167,7 +167,8 @@ to an appointment. This page carries the verifiable record.
    engineering, operating a company — told as one arc rather than three lists.
 3. **Credentials**, structured and scannable: designations, education,
    certifications, memberships. Every line from `AGENTS.md` §4 Verified.
-4. **The credentialing arc.** Q.Med held → Q.Arb in progress → C.Med-Arb as the
+4. **The credentialing arc.** Q.Med held → Q.Arb **commenced August 2026** →
+   C.Med-Arb as the
    endpoint. The brief (§V) treats the arc itself as part of the story; say so
    openly rather than implying a finished state.
 5. **Languages and cross-cultural practice.**
@@ -176,8 +177,14 @@ to an appointment. This page carries the verifiable record.
 7. `Person` JSON-LD. Downloadable one-page PDF bio — brief §VIII lists this as
    an asset for circulation with appointment proposals.
 
-> **The PDF bio does NOT ship with build step 3, and the omission is stated
-> rather than silent** — `AGENTS.md` Q45, opened 2026-08-28. No such file exists
+> **The PDF bio ships at BUILD STEP 9, alongside `/fees/` — deferred by Pouya
+> 2026-08-28 (Q45), tracked as `AGENTS.md` §12 **R16**.** His reasoning: it is a
+> derived artefact, so building it before `/about/` and `/fees/` are final means
+> building it twice, and an appointment proposal needs the fee card as much as
+> the bio. The two decisions below are **not** settled by the deferral and travel
+> with R16. Original note follows, and its reasoning is why this is R16 rather
+> than a to-do. **The PDF bio does NOT ship with build step 3, and the omission
+> is stated rather than silent** — `AGENTS.md` Q45, opened 2026-08-28. No such file exists
 > in the repo, and a link to one that does not exist is a broken link on the
 > page an appointing body reads. It is also not a formatting job: a one-page bio
 > is a **credential document** whose every line has to trace to §4 exactly as a
@@ -214,8 +221,11 @@ neutral.
 2. **Tracks:** documents-only, expedited, full hearing.
 3. **Rules:** ADRIC, ADR Chambers, ad hoc.
 4. Awards — form, reasoning, timing.
-5. **Credentialing status, stated plainly.** The Q.Arb pathway is in progress;
-   the page says so. **What is available now is all three forms — sole,
+5. **Credentialing status, stated plainly.** The Q.Arb pathway **commenced
+   August 2026**; the page says so in those words. *"In progress" was the
+   wording here until 2026-08-28 and it is barred — `docs/06`'s own cutover
+   checklist says "§4's wording, not the looser 'in progress'", and this is the
+   spec for the page that has to get it right.* **What is available now is all three forms — sole,
    party-appointed and co-arbitration** — and `AGENTS.md` §4 Offerings carries a
    row for each `[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya]`. The page states that alongside
    the credentialing stage: Q.Arb commenced August 2026, C.Med-Arb is the
@@ -247,8 +257,20 @@ long-term narrative.
 
 Six cards, one paragraph each, linking onward. Also the natural home for the
 "also offered" strip: **early neutral evaluation, dispute-system design, and
-pre-dispute technical advisory** — three, and each now has an `AGENTS.md` §4
-Offerings row, which is what the strip needs before it may ship.
+pre-dispute technical advisory** — three, and each has an `AGENTS.md` §4
+Offerings row.
+
+> 🚫 **THE STRIP MAY NOT SHIP YET, AND HAVING A ROW IS NOT WHAT UNBLOCKS IT.**
+> All three rows read **"GATES 0 AND 2 ANSWERED; GATE 1 STILL HAS NO SOURCE —
+> NOT YET PUBLISHABLE"**. Pouya ruled on 2026-08-28 that all three pass; §4's
+> gate 1 asks *is the activity gated?*, which the register answers with a
+> checkable source and not with a ruling, and **no source exists for any of the
+> three**. Tracked as **Q46(a)**, which names this strip as the thing it blocks.
+>
+> This paragraph read *"each now has a §4 Offerings row, which is what the strip
+> needs before it may ship"* until 2026-08-28 — **false as stated**, and it would
+> have had an implementer at step 5 ship three offerings the register marks
+> unpublishable. Found by `claims-auditor` on re-audit.
 
 > **`settlement counsel` IS STRUCK FROM THIS STRIP AND MUST NOT BE RESTORED.**
 > `AGENTS.md` Q42, 2026-08-27. Pouya struck it as his own error in this document:

docs/03-content-spec.md

@@ -13,6 +13,47 @@ table before writing any number, statistic, or superlative. If you need a fact
 you do not have, write `TODO(pouya): <exact question>` and log it in §9. Do not
 infer, do not soften, do not carry anything over from the old site.
 
+### When a fact is `[unestablished]`, write around the capacity question
+
+**Ratified by Pouya 2026-08-28 as a reusable pattern, with the instruction that
+it will recur.** §4 records licence status as `[unestablished]` and says: *do not
+assert it, do not deny it.* Copy that addresses the question at all must
+therefore pick neither side — and the trap is that **both obvious phrasings pick
+one.**
+
+The worked example, which took three attempts and two audits:
+
+| Attempt | Copy | Why it failed |
+|---|---|---|
+| 1 | "I **do not** give legal advice" | *"Do not"* is an **election** — it implies entitlement withheld by choice. Flagged by audit 1 |
+| 2 | "I **cannot** give legal advice" | *"Cannot"* is a **denial** of capacity. Flagged by audit 2 |
+| 3 ✅ | "I act as a neutral. I do not act for a party in a matter I take, and each party should have their own legal advice." | Makes **no capacity claim at all** |
+
+**Both audits were right, and that is why the third version works.** Attempts 1
+and 2 are opposite answers to the same question, so flagging both is not
+inconsistency — it is the correct finding twice. Pouya: *"'do not' elects,
+'cannot' denies, and §4 says do neither. The shipped sentence makes no capacity
+claim at all — it describes the role and points the reader somewhere useful."*
+
+**The pattern, stated for reuse:**
+
+> Do not look for a *softer* way to answer the capacity question. Any word that
+> answers it — *cannot, do not, am not, is not permitted, is not qualified* —
+> takes a side of a fact this register does not hold. Instead write the sentence
+> so the question **does not arise**: state the **role**, state the
+> **consequence** for the reader, and stop.
+
+Three tests before shipping such a sentence. It fails if any is yes:
+
+1. Could a reader infer from it that he **is** entitled to do the thing?
+2. Could a reader infer from it that he is **not**?
+3. Does it contain a verb of capacity or permission attached to him at all?
+
+**Where this will come up next:** `/practice/` (step 5) and `/for-parties/`, both
+of which have to tell an unrepresented party what the neutral will and will not
+do for them — the exact place the "cannot" phrasing feels most natural and is
+most wrong.
+
 ---
 
 ## Voice
@@ -38,8 +79,18 @@ detect padding instantly and discount everything after it.
 
   The shape of the bullet still stands, so here is a sentence that fits it and
   clears the register: *"I accept sole, party-appointed and co-arbitration
-  appointments. The Q.Arb designation commenced in August 2026; C.Med-Arb is the
-  endpoint."* The limit being named is the **stage of the arc**, stated plainly —
+  appointments **in commercial matters**. The Q.Arb **pathway** commenced in
+  August 2026; C.Med-Arb is the endpoint."* **"in commercial matters" is not
+  optional** — every §4 Offerings arbitration row is scoped commercial, family
+  arbitration has its own NOT OFFERED row, and §4's NOT-NEGOTIABLE boundary
+  records the unscoped class form as the struck universal (Q39). This model
+  sentence was unscoped until 2026-08-28 while the shipped page it feeds was
+  scoped; found by `claims-auditor` on re-audit, one file over from the same
+  defect fixed in `docs/04` earlier the same day. **"Pathway", never "designation"** — a *designation* that
+  "commenced in August 2026" reads as in force since then, i.e. **held**, which
+  §4 Forbidden bars outright. This model sentence said "designation" until
+  2026-08-28 and it is copy an implementer is told to lift; found by
+  `claims-auditor`. The limit being named is the **stage of the arc**, stated plainly —
   Pouya's instruction is that being open about it is the differentiator, so do
   not hedge it into vagueness and do not drop it. (**No tribunal-secretary
   work** — D14
@@ -58,8 +109,12 @@ detect padding instantly and discount everything after it.
   **The approved phrasing is "active litigation exposure" or "involvement in
   litigation and ADR matters" — never "practice" in that context.** Pouya's
   wording, 2026-08-26. So: *Director of Firm Operations at a Toronto litigation
-  and ADR boutique, with active exposure to construction, personal injury, POA,
-  and SABS matters.* Accurate, specific, and it claims nothing it should not.
+  and ADR boutique, with **active litigation exposure** across construction,
+  personal injury, POA, and SABS matters.* Accurate, specific, and it claims
+  nothing it should not. *(This example read "with active exposure to" until
+  2026-08-28 — a **third** variant of the phrasing, three lines below the
+  sentence naming the only two approved forms, in the one place where the wording
+  IS the compliance. Found by `claims-auditor` on re-audit.)*
 
   This framing is **interim** — see `AGENTS.md` §12 R1. Raise it with Pouya
   rather than letting it settle in by default.
@@ -83,7 +138,7 @@ detect padding instantly and discount everything after it.
 Reused, adapted, across the hero, the About page, and the PDF bio:
 
 > The dispute resolution practice of Pouya Lajevardi — a credentialed neutral
-> who is also close to live litigation and a practising machine-learning and
+> with active litigation exposure and a practising machine-learning and
 > infrastructure engineer. Built for commercial, construction, energy,
 > technology, and cross-cultural disputes that turn on the contract, the code,
 > the engineering documents, and the regulatory overlay around them.
@@ -213,9 +268,16 @@ redrawing the loop into a line.* First person: "my mark", not "our mark".
 400–600 words of narrative, then structured credentials. Tell the three tracks
 as one arc, not three lists: a JD and active litigation exposure; a parallel
 career in machine learning and infrastructure engineering; a company run
-alongside both. The arc is the point — the credentialing pathway from Q.Med
-through Q.Arb to C.Med-Arb is stated openly as in progress. The brief treats
-that arc as part of the story rather than something to obscure.
+alongside the practice — §4's wording; "alongside both" was a concurrency claim
+the register does not make. The arc is the point — the credentialing pathway from Q.Med
+through Q.Arb to C.Med-Arb is stated openly, **with Q.Arb described as
+commenced August 2026** and never as "in progress", which is looser than §4 and
+is barred by `docs/06`'s cutover checklist. The brief treats that arc as part of
+the story rather than something to obscure.
+
+The designation names expand as **Qualified Mediator**, **Qualified Arbitrator**
+and **Chartered Med-Arbitrator** — ADRIO's own forms, sourced in
+`docs/reference/adrio-designations.md`. Never "Chartered Mediator-Arbitrator".
 
 Omit any section that would be empty. No "Speaking" heading until there is a
 talk to list.
@@ -272,9 +334,26 @@ evasions, no "contact for pricing" after promising a rate card.
 
 ### For parties
 The one page in second person. Grade-9 reading level. Short sentences. Says
-explicitly: the mediator is not your lawyer and cannot give you legal advice; the
-mediator does not decide who is right. Answers what it costs and what happens if
-you do not settle.
+explicitly: **the mediator is a neutral and does not act for either party; each
+party should have their own legal advice;** and the mediator does not decide who
+is right. Answers what it costs and what happens if you do not settle.
+
+> ⚠️ **THIS DIRECTIVE READ *"the mediator is not your lawyer and cannot give you
+> legal advice"* UNTIL 2026-08-28, AND IT BREACHED D13 TWICE** — in the file that
+> warns, fifty lines above, that `/for-parties/` is *"the exact place the
+> 'cannot' phrasing feels most natural and is most wrong"*.
+>
+> 1. **"not your lawyer" presupposes lawyer status.** §4 Forbidden bars *the word
+>    "lawyer" used of Pouya*, and D13 treats implication as hard as assertion. A
+>    negation still carries the presupposition.
+> 2. **"cannot give you legal advice" is attempt 2** in this file's own ratified
+>    table — *"a **denial** of capacity"* — and it fails test 3 and the
+>    compliance-checklist item, both added to this file in the same change set
+>    that left this line untouched.
+>
+> The replacement is the ratified pattern applied verbatim: **role, then
+> consequence for the reader, and no verb of capacity.** Found by
+> `claims-auditor` on re-audit; the original sweep did not reach this section.
 
 ### Insights
 1,200–1,800 words, monthly cadence (brief §VIII). Territories from §VII:
@@ -313,3 +392,18 @@ Drafted by Claude, **every word reviewed by Pouya before publication**:
 - [ ] Contact page states that an inquiry creates no retainer and no
       mediator–party relationship
 - [ ] Any comparative claim is factual and verifiable
+- [ ] No sentence answers the licence-capacity question in **either** direction —
+      see *When a fact is `[unestablished]`* above. Check for *cannot*, *do not*,
+      *am not*, *not permitted*, *not qualified* **attached to giving legal
+      advice, practising law, or holding a licence.** The objection is to
+      answering the *capacity* question, not to the words themselves — the
+      approved sentence contains "do not" and passes: *"I act as a neutral. I do
+      not act for a party in a matter I take, and each party should have their
+      own legal advice."* That is **role conduct**, which he may state freely.
+      *(This item shipped unscoped for one pass and `adversarial-reviewer` showed
+      it would fail the exact sentence the section exists to bless — and the
+      checklist is what gets grepped.)*
+- [ ] Abbreviations expanded on §11 Glossary's authority only — and expansions
+      for the five ADR designations checked against
+      `docs/reference/adrio-designations.md`, not from memory. "Chartered
+      **Med**-Arbitrator", never "Mediator-Arbitrator"

docs/04-seo-spec.md

@@ -101,8 +101,8 @@ JSON-LD only. Validate against Google's Rich Results Test before cutover.
 
 | Type | Where | Notes |
 |---|---|---|
-| `Person` | `/about/`, referenced site-wide | `name`, `jobTitle`, `description`, `alumniOf` (Bond University), `knowsLanguage` (en, fa), `hasCredential` (Q.Med), `sameAs` (LinkedIn), `image`. **`jobTitle` = "Director of Firm Operations"; omit `worksFor`** — populating it either names the boutique (D16) or misstates the employer |
-| `ProfessionalService` | Home | `areaServed` Toronto/Ontario, `serviceType` Mediation/Arbitration, `provider` → Person, `priceRange` once `/fees/` is real. **Never `LegalService`** — schema.org defines it as a business providing legal advice and *representation*, which asserts in machine-readable form exactly what D13 bars and §4 Forbidden calls out |
+| `Person` | `/about/`, referenced site-wide | **Emitted:** `name`, `url`, `jobTitle`, `description`, `alumniOf` (Bond University), `knowsLanguage` (en, fa), `hasCredential` (Q.Med), `sameAs` (LinkedIn), `email`, `image`. **Withheld:** `worksFor`, `memberOf`. *(This enumeration listed `worksFor` as emitted while the same cell said it was withheld, and omitted `url` and `email`, which are — wrong in both directions. The enumeration is the part an implementer copies. Found by `adversarial-reviewer`.)* **CHANGED 2026-08-28 — Q47.** This row read *"`jobTitle` = 'Director of Firm Operations'; omit `worksFor`"*, which put the boutique title on a node whose `url` is this ADR practice's `/about/` — so a consumer could attach it to this entity. Pouya's ruling reframes the field: `jobTitle` describes **this practice**, not the boutique role, which D16 keeps unnamed. The visible role line is unchanged and still reads "Director of Firm Operations at a Toronto litigation and ADR boutique". **THE VALUE IS `PRACTICE_JOB_TITLE` IN `src/data/site.ts` AND THIS ROW DOES NOT RESTATE IT** — §7's rule, applied to a string with a live revert trigger on it: this row carried the literal text for one pass, and `adversarial-reviewer` noted it would go stale the moment the constant moved. Cite, do not copy. **`worksFor` IS WITHHELD** — set for one pass under Q47, then reverted: `ProfessionalService.provider` is this Person, so `provider → Person → worksFor` asserts the same-entity claim `schema.ts` explicitly declines, and §4 says "alongside the practice" where the ruling says "operates through". **`memberOf` is withheld too**, on volatility grounds, even though Q44 closed. Both are **Q49**. See `src/data/schema.ts` |
+| `ProfessionalService` | Home | `areaServed` Toronto/Ontario, `serviceType` **Mediation / Commercial arbitration / Mediation-arbitration (med-arb)** — *scoped 2026-08-28 on `claims-auditor`'s finding; this row instructed the unscoped class form "Mediation/Arbitration" that Q39 struck and that `schema.ts` deliberately does not follow. Family arbitration carries prescribed training and has its own NOT OFFERED row, so unscoped "Arbitration" is the struck universal in a field nobody reads. Do not widen these strings without a §4 row to widen them from* — `provider` → Person, `priceRange` once `/fees/` is real. **Never `LegalService`** — schema.org defines it as a business providing legal advice and *representation*, which asserts in machine-readable form exactly what D13 bars and §4 Forbidden calls out |
 | `Service` | Each practice page | `serviceType`, `provider` → Person, `areaServed` |
 | `Article` | Each article | `headline`, `description`, `datePublished`, `dateModified`, `author` → Person, `image` |
 | `BreadcrumbList` | All nested pages | Matches visible breadcrumbs |

docs/06-deployment.md

@@ -34,13 +34,27 @@ cache headers, and the same invalidation as the workflow — at this scale the
 pipeline changes only **how a deploy is triggered**, not what it does. Treat the
 script and the workflow as one artefact in two places: change one, change both.
 
-Two things block the workflow, and neither is a fact to look up:
+One thing blocks the workflow, and it is not a fact to look up:
 
-- **`adr-sml-deploy` does not exist** — `aws iam get-user` returns
-  `NoSuchEntity` (§7, Q22). Create it from *Create the user* below.
 - **Actions are not enabled and no runner is registered** (Q23). The Gitea
   instance is jointly administered, so both need its second administrator.
 
+> ✅ **`adr-sml-deploy` EXISTS — created 2026-08-26, Q22 closed 2026-08-28.**
+> **DO NOT CREATE IT.** This bullet said *"`adr-sml-deploy` does not exist —
+> `aws iam get-user` returns `NoSuchEntity`… Create it from Create the user
+> below"* until 2026-08-28, and an operator following it would have created a
+> **second** IAM user, or hand-provisioned one with a different scope from the
+> `adr-sml-deploy-minimal` policy §7 now records. §7 carries the inventory and
+> the eight `simulate-principal-policy` results.
+>
+> *Found by `adversarial-reviewer`: the Q22 flip to PROVISIONED was swept in
+> `AGENTS.md` and nowhere else, and the Change Log entry's sweep block covered
+> the copy corrections only. Same shape as the SES-DKIM inversion — the stale
+> copy instructed an action against a High-risk credential.*
+>
+> *Create the user* below is retained as the **record of how it was
+> provisioned**, not as an instruction. Read it that way.
+
 The script **refuses to run as `user/pouya`** — the broadly-permissioned
 personal user that has been authenticating to this account. See §10.
 
@@ -329,18 +343,47 @@ Then invalidate `/*`.
 
 **Content and compliance**
 - [ ] Every claim traced to `AGENTS.md` §4 Verified
-- [ ] **Memberships re-confirmed with Pouya, then published** — `AGENTS.md` §12
-      **R10** and **Q44**. ADRIC, ADRIO, the three OBA sections and the Canadian
-      Tax Foundation are `[verified 2026-08-26]`. **§4 records yearly renewal for
-      the OBA sections and the CTF only** — it says nothing about ADRIC's or
-      ADRIO's period, and an earlier version of this line asserted "all renew
-      yearly", which §4 does not support. **`/about/` currently publishes NO
-      memberships group**: R10 is a prohibition and the re-confirmation was not
-      obtained, so the group is withheld behind a `TODO(pouya)`. OCNI already
-      lapsed quietly and §4 records it as "not current, do not publish" — that is
-      the failure mode, and a stamp is not a renewal receipt. Re-confirm,
-      re-stamp §4 and `CREDENTIALS.memberships`, restore the group to
-      `CREDENTIAL_GROUPS`, and add `memberOf` to the Person JSON-LD
+- [ ] **Memberships RE-CONFIRMED AGAIN, on the day of cutover** — `AGENTS.md`
+      §12 **R10**, which is now an **event trigger and cutover is one of its two
+      events.** Q44 closed 2026-08-28 and the group is published on `/about/`
+      (ADRIC, ADRIO, the three OBA sections, the CTF, `[verified 2026-08-28 —
+      Pouya]`), so this item is no longer "publish them" — it is **"ask him
+      again, then re-stamp §4 with the cutover date."**
+      **Pouya declined renewal-date tracking**, which is exactly why this sits on
+      the checklist: there is no date on which anyone would otherwise re-check.
+      OCNI lapsed quietly and §4 records it as "not current, do not publish" —
+      found roughly a year late. A stamp is not a renewal receipt.
+      **Do NOT add a currency sentence to the page while you are here** — his
+      ruling is *"list the memberships; promise nothing about their future
+      state"*, and the struck sentence stays struck.
+      **Do NOT add `memberOf` to the Person JSON-LD** unless Pouya has said to.
+      It is withheld deliberately and on narrower grounds than the visible page:
+      the reason is recorded in `src/data/schema.ts` and **it is an open
+      judgement, not a settled one — `AGENTS.md` Q53.** Do not restate the
+      reasoning here; a third copy is how the first two went stale.
+      **§4 records yearly renewal for the OBA sections and the CTF only** — it
+      says nothing about ADRIC's or ADRIO's period, and an earlier version of
+      this line asserted "all renew yearly", which §4 does not support.
+- [ ] **`AGENTS.md` Q51 answered before cutover** — does listing the **OBA
+      sections** on `/about/` carry the licensure implication that excludes the
+      LSO? §4 excludes the Law Society precisely because *"listing the Law Society
+      among memberships implies licensure"*, and Forbidden bars *any phrasing that
+      **implies** entitlement to practise law*. The OBA sections **went live on
+      `/about/` on 2026-08-28** and Q51 was raised the same day, **after** Pouya's
+      Q44 ruling authorised the group — so the ruling did not consider it.
+      `adversarial-reviewer` rates it moderate-low confidence as a defect and
+      **high confidence that the question is unasked**: `grep -n OBA AGENTS.md`
+      returns rows on renewal, scope and stamping and nothing on implication, and
+      OBA membership eligibility is not established anywhere in this repo. It sits
+      beside **R1** — same subject, same page, and not settleable internally. If
+      the answer is yes, the fix is the LSO fix: exclude deliberately, and record
+      that it was excluded rather than omitted.
+      *(This item did not exist until 2026-08-28. Q48, which governs nothing
+      currently on the site, had a checklist item while Q51, which governs live
+      public copy, had none.)*
+      **Also re-check `AGENTS.md` Q48** before re-stamping: if `Q.Med` retention
+      turns out to depend on ADRIO membership currency, this item covers the
+      site's central credential and not just a list
 - [ ] No `TODO(pouya)` remains in any shipped page
 - [ ] No matter counts, rates, dollar figures, or testimonials anywhere
 - [ ] Q.Arb described as **commenced August 2026** everywhere it appears — §4's

docs/07-fees.md

@@ -104,13 +104,18 @@ All figures **plus HST**.
 
 ### Arbitration
 
-Sole, party-appointed and co-arbitration appointments are all accepted now —
-`AGENTS.md` §4 Offerings carries a row for each `[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya]`.
+Sole, party-appointed and co-arbitration appointments **in commercial matters**
+are all accepted now — `AGENTS.md` §4 Offerings carries a row for each
+`[verified 2026-08-26 — Pouya]`. *("in commercial matters" added 2026-08-28: the
+line was unscoped, and every §4 arbitration row is scoped commercial with family
+arbitration separately NOT OFFERED — Q39's struck universal.)*
 *(This line previously read "sole appointments follow the Q.Arb designation",
 which understated the offering, and carried a caveat against a since-closed
 Q36.)* Whatever `/fees/` says about arbitration must state the Q.Arb stage
 plainly alongside it — §4 Offerings, "neither half may be dropped": the Q.Arb
-designation commenced August 2026, with C.Med-Arb as the endpoint. See
+**pathway** commenced August 2026, with C.Med-Arb as the endpoint. *("pathway",
+not "designation" — a designation that commenced reads as held, which §4
+Forbidden bars. Corrected 2026-08-28 on `claims-auditor`'s finding.)* See
 `03-content-spec.md` for the wording.
 
 | Item | Fee |
@@ -128,6 +133,17 @@ offer tribunal-secretary work on the site.
 Early neutral evaluation, dispute-system design, and pre-dispute technical
 advisory: **$500 / hour**.
 
+> 🚫 **A RATE IS NOT A PUBLICATION LICENCE, AND THESE THREE ARE NOT PUBLISHABLE
+> YET.** §4's ENE row says the pricing here *"is a fee-page question, not a
+> publication licence"*, and all three Offerings rows read **NOT YET
+> PUBLISHABLE** — gate 1 (*is the activity gated?*) has no source. **Q46(a)**
+> names `docs/07-fees.md` pricing directly as something it blocks.
+>
+> So: the rate is recorded and settled; **the line item does not go on `/fees/`
+> until Q46(a) closes.** This note did not exist until 2026-08-28, which meant
+> the gate lived only in `AGENTS.md` while this file says "Build `/fees/` from
+> it". Found by `claims-auditor` on re-audit.
+
 **THREE services, not four. `settlement counsel` is struck and must not be
 priced** — `AGENTS.md` Q42, Pouya 2026-08-27, correcting his own entry in
 `docs/01`:

docs/reference/adrio-designations.md

@@ -0,0 +1,251 @@
+# Reference — ADRIO's own expansions of the five ADR designations
+
+**Why this file exists.** `AGENTS.md` Q46(b) asked whether §11 Glossary may be
+published as the source for **definitional expansions** — what `Q.Med`, `Q.Arb`
+and `C.Med-Arb` stand for. Pouya ratified the standard on 2026-08-28 and
+attached a condition: *"Fetch and commit
+https://adr-ontario.ca/members-practitioners/professional-designations to
+docs/reference/ per R14."* This is that fetch.
+
+It also settles a **correction Pouya raised in the same ruling**, and the
+correction was his own: §11 had said *"Chartered Mediator-Arbitrator"* since the
+file was created. ADRIO's term is **"Chartered Med-Arbitrator"**. See Finding 2.
+
+---
+
+## Provenance — read this before quoting anything below
+
+| | |
+|---|---|
+| URL as given | `https://adr-ontario.ca/members-practitioners/professional-designations` |
+| **Redirects to** | `https://adr-ontario.ca/professional-designations/` — HTTP **301**, one hop |
+| Retrieved | **2026-08-28** |
+| Method | `curl -sSL -o <file> '<url>'` — HTTP **200** on all five after the redirect |
+
+**The redirect is recorded because the first fetch did not follow it.** `curl -sS`
+without `-L` returned HTTP 301 and wrote a **0-byte file**, which a reader of
+the output could easily have taken for "the page is empty". It is not; it is
+one hop away. `CLAUDE.md`: *a command that did not run is not evidence of
+absence* — and a command that ran and returned nothing useful looks the same.
+
+### The five files, with digests
+
+| Page | Bytes | Text | `sha256` |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| `professional-designations/` | 54,961 | 1,932 | `5eca45791b3629d16186dd2a10df43fdd5981cbe89a6ce23d8b43ec7c4c415a8` |
+| `qualified-mediator-q-med-qualified-arbitrator-q-arb/` | 57,174 | 2,814 | `c8cb8ad556b7ffd193cb672f136d4c0b0bdffdcaa8ac20739f31c1ccef84301f` |
+| `chartered-mediator-c-med/` | 58,929 | 4,151 | `47cb8edb20681865b55103e265c693405a8dfde369fd5f4eefd340fb58f0c056` |
+| `chartered-arbitrator-c-arb/` | 58,013 | 3,524 | `44526cb40f3e99bec03e3b45b13d4dc4b6cb5fd4e13b388ed533f7baa6fb1199` |
+| `chartered-med-arbitrator-c-med-arb/` | 55,966 | 2,504 | `4c3a3214383c80209884125703e89625e855b550f01ea8141df496603cdd69c7` |
+
+*Text* = characters remaining after `<script>`/`<style>`/`<noscript>`/comments
+and tags are stripped, entities unescaped, whitespace collapsed.
+
+> 📁 **THE EXTRACTED TEXT AND THE SCRIPT THAT PRODUCED IT ARE COMMITTED** —
+> `adrio-extract/`. Every term count in this file was run against those `.txt`
+> files, and `extract.mjs` is the extraction. **The digests above cover the raw
+> HTML; they said nothing about the extraction**, so the counts were unverifiable
+> by construction (R14) even while the digests were not —
+> `adversarial-reviewer`, 2026-08-28. `adrio-extract/README.md` carries the
+> reproduction command and the caveat that a future digest mismatch is most
+> likely a WordPress plugin bump rather than a changed designation name.
+
+> ✅ **THESE DIGESTS ARE STAMPED, AND `lat-case-conference.md`'S ARE NOT — THE
+> DIFFERENCE WAS CHECKED, NOT ASSUMED.** That file removed its hashes because the
+> LAT pages could not reproduce one: `LAT-Rules.html` carries a per-request
+> bot-detection nonce (`__uzdbm_1`, `__uzdbm_2`) and the AABS page carries
+> rotating WordPress `?ver=` cache-busters.
+>
+> Both causes were looked for here and **both are absent**:
+>
+> - `__uzdbm` — **0 occurrences.**
+> - `?ver=` — 17 occurrences, and they are **static plugin version strings**
+>   (`?ver=1.3.12`, `?ver=2.3.2`, `?ver=3.4.1`, `?ver=4.7.0`), not rotating
+>   values. Same string on every fetch.
+>
+> Then measured rather than reasoned about: **four independent fetches of each of
+> the five URLs, and the file on disk re-hashed against a fresh fetch. All five
+> MATCH.** The digests above are of the exact bytes the quotes below came from.
+>
+> **One instrument failure happened during that check and is recorded because of
+> its shape.** The first comparison loop used `set -- $pair` under zsh, which
+> does not word-split unquoted variables, so the loop body received one argument
+> and every comparison silently failed — printing **`DIFFER` on all five rows**.
+> That output reads exactly like *"the pages changed under me"*. It was the
+> `timeout 60 ls "$DRIVE"` shape: the comparison had never run. Re-run with
+> `while IFS=: read`, all five returned MATCH.
+
+**Instrument note on JS-rendered shells.** The parent page extracts to **1,932
+characters from 54,961 bytes — 3.5%**, which is the signature `adric.ca` produced
+when it defeated an earlier attempt at this same sourcing (4,840 chars from
+114,985). Here the low ratio is **not** a shell: the parent page really is nearly
+empty — its body is a title and one sentence pointing elsewhere. The substance is
+on the four child pages, which extract at 4.5–7.0% because ~1,800 characters of
+the extraction on every page is the shared navigation. Read the ratio against the
+page, not against a threshold.
+
+---
+
+## Finding 1 — all five expansions, verbatim
+
+Present **twice** on the parent page (desktop and mobile navigation), and again
+as the `<h1>` of each child page. ADRIO's own words, entities unescaped:
+
+| Abbrev. | ADRIO's expansion | Source |
+|---|---|---|
+| `Q.Med` | **Qualified Mediator** | nav + child `<h1>` |
+| `Q.Arb` | **Qualified Arbitrator** | nav + child `<h1>` |
+| `C.Med` | **Chartered Mediator** | nav + child `<h1>` |
+| `C.Arb` | **Chartered Arbitrator** | nav + child `<h1>` |
+| `C.Med-Arb` | **Chartered Med-Arbitrator** | nav + child `<h1>` |
+
+The navigation markup, verbatim:
+
+```html
+<a href="https://adr-ontario.ca/qualified-mediator-q-med-qualified-arbitrator-q-arb/">Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) &#038; Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)</a>
+<a href="https://adr-ontario.ca/chartered-mediator-c-med/">Chartered Mediator (C.Med)</a>
+<a href="https://adr-ontario.ca/chartered-arbitrator-c-arb/">Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)</a>
+<a href="https://adr-ontario.ca/chartered-med-arbitrator-c-med-arb/">Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)</a>
+```
+
+**The URL slugs corroborate independently of the link text** — `chartered-med-arbitrator-c-med-arb`, not `chartered-mediator-arbitrator`.
+
+## Finding 2 — the expansion this repo had wrong
+
+`AGENTS.md` §11 read **"Chartered Mediator-Arbitrator"** from the file's creation
+until 2026-08-28. Pouya's ruling: *"§11 has said 'Chartered Mediator-Arbitrator'
+throughout. ADRIO's own term is 'Chartered Med-Arbitrator'. I took the expansion
+from the strategy brief and never sourced it."*
+
+**It had reached a public page.** `src/pages/about.astro`'s credential arc
+rendered it as body copy, and `grep -c 'Chartered Mediator-Arbitrator'
+dist/about/index.html` returned **1** — so the built artefact carried it too. Four
+instances in the repo, swept 2026-08-28.
+
+The child page's own heading and first two sentences, verbatim:
+
+> **Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)**
+>
+> Med-Arb is a distinct, innovative standalone process that is not as well known
+> or understood by consumers of ADR services compared to mediation and
+> arbitration.
+>
+> Med-Arb is not merely the merging of separate mediation and arbitration
+> processes, but a unique process designed to meet the needs of particular
+> disputants. It involves nuances and complexities that can be fine-tuned to the
+> needs of the parties as a customized dispute resolution process, which requires
+> a high level of practitioner competence to do successfully.
+
+## Finding 3 — how ADRIO characterises the Q-level designations
+
+Verbatim, `qualified-mediator-q-med-qualified-arbitrator-q-arb/`:
+
+> **Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) / Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)**
+>
+> These designations are to recognize practitioners who have completed sufficient
+> mediation / arbitration and related dispute resolution training to be qualified
+> to practice. They are an intermediate step for practitioners working to receive
+> their Chartered designation.
+>
+> *Q.Med criteria vary across affiliates. For the criteria specific to Ontario,
+> be sure to read the checklist on the application form.*
+
+⚠️ **Do not lift "qualified to practice" into copy, in any form.** It is ADRIO
+describing its own designation, and on this site — where §4 records licence
+status as `[unestablished]` and D13 bars any phrasing that *implies* entitlement
+to practise law — the phrase would do work ADRIO never intended it to do. The
+quote is here so a reviewer can see the full sentence, not so it can be reused.
+
+The *"intermediate step … working to receive their Chartered designation"* half
+is the sourced basis for describing the arc as an arc. It is a fact about the
+designation structure, not about Pouya.
+
+## Finding 4 — two of the four pages state a retention condition, and the split is by PAGE TYPE, not by designation level
+
+> ⚠️ **THIS FINDING'S FIRST VERSION WAS FRAMED WRONG, AND THE PAGE THAT
+> FALSIFIED IT WAS ONE THIS FILE HAD ALREADY FETCHED.** It was headed *"the two
+> Chartered pages state a retention condition; the Q page does not"* and argued a
+> **Qualified-vs-Chartered** asymmetry. There are **three** Chartered pages. The
+> count was never run on `chartered-med-arbitrator-c-med-arb/` — the designation
+> §4 records as the practice's stated goal, and therefore the one most
+> load-bearing for Q48. Found by `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-28.
+
+Counted on the extracted text of **all four** designation pages:
+
+| Page | `good standing` | `annual` | `maintain` | `retain` | `member of the ADR Institute` |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| `qualified-mediator-q-med-qualified-arbitrator-q-arb/` | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
+| `chartered-mediator-c-med/` | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
+| `chartered-arbitrator-c-arb/` | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
+| `chartered-med-arbitrator-c-med-arb/` | **0** | **0** | **0** | **0** | **0** |
+
+Verbatim, `chartered-mediator-c-med/`:
+
+> There is an annual fee to maintain your C.Med designation, payable to ADR
+> Institute of Canada, Inc. The national organization bills you every year. You
+> must also remain a member in good standing with the ADR Institute of Ontario™
+> to retain this designation.
+
+`chartered-arbitrator-c-arb/` says the same of C.Arb.
+
+**The corrected reading.** C.Med-Arb scores zero on every term, exactly like the
+Q-level page — so the line does **not** fall between Qualified and Chartered. It
+falls between **page types**: `chartered-mediator-c-med/` and
+`chartered-arbitrator-c-arb/` are long application FAQs with numbered sections
+("Are there prerequisites?", "Is there an ongoing cost?"), while the Q page and
+the C.Med-Arb page are short descriptions that link out. The C.Med-Arb page says
+so in as many words: *"To read more about the C.Med-Arb designation, including
+how to apply, click here."*
+
+**And that cuts the opposite way from how the first version read it.** A stub
+page's silence is evidence about the *page*, not about the designation — so
+Q.Med's silence is most likely "this page does not cover fees or retention", not
+"no such condition exists". ADRIC bills annually for the two designations that
+say so, and ADRIO notes that *"Q.Med criteria vary across affiliates"*.
+
+**Still: this source does not answer it, in either direction, and must not be
+read as doing so.** Raised as **Q48** — if `Q.Med` retention is contingent on
+ADRIO membership currency, then §4's Q.Med row, this site's central credential,
+inherits the shelf life of the memberships Pouya has declined to track by date
+(R10). The answer needs the Q.Med criteria document or ADRIC/ADRIO directly.
+
+## Finding 5 — two superlatives, deliberately not lifted
+
+The Chartered pages call C.Med *"Canada's most senior official designation for
+practising mediators"* and C.Arb *"Canada's only official designation for
+practising Arbitrators"*. Both are ADRIO's words about its own designations and
+both are quotable in principle.
+
+**Neither goes on the site.** §4 Forbidden bars superlatives outright
+(*"best", "leading", "top-rated"*), and the reason given there is not only
+verifiability — it is that *"they read as insecure to the audience this site is
+for"*. A superlative does not stop being one because a third party said it first,
+and the credential arc does not need it: **"the designation this practice is built
+toward"** is Pouya's own stated goal and has a §4 row.
+
+---
+
+## What this establishes, and what it does not
+
+**Establishes:**
+
+1. All five expansions, in ADRIO's own words, from ADRIO's own site, with
+   reproducible digests. **R14 is satisfied for Q46(b)** — the standard no longer
+   rests on §11 asserting its own content.
+2. `C.Med-Arb` = **Chartered Med-Arbitrator**. The form this repo published was
+   wrong.
+3. That the Q-level designations are, in ADRIO's characterisation, an
+   intermediate step toward the Chartered designations.
+
+**Does not establish:**
+
+- **Anything about Pouya.** Not that he holds Q.Med, not that he has commenced
+  Q.Arb, not that he is a member of ADRIO. Those are §4 Verified rows and this
+  file is not a substitute for one. The standard Pouya ratified is exactly this
+  split: *"§11 Glossary is the source for DEFINITIONAL expansions; §4 remains
+  the only source for claims about Pouya."*
+- **Anything about gating** — see `AGENTS.md` §4's offering test, question 1.
+  ADRIO describes its designations as recognising completed training; it says
+  nothing about what any activity requires by law, and it is not a source that
+  could. Q46(a) is not advanced by this file.
+- **Anything about Q.Med retention.** Finding 4. That is Q48.

docs/reference/adrio-extract/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+# The extracted text behind `../adrio-designations.md`
+
+**Why this directory exists.** `adversarial-reviewer` (2026-08-28, C10): the
+`sha256` digests in that file cover the **raw HTML**, but Finding 4's term counts
+were taken from **extracted text produced by an uncommitted script** — so the
+counts were unverifiable by construction (R14) even though the digests were not.
+
+`extract.mjs` is that script. `*.txt` are its outputs, which are what every
+count in `../adrio-designations.md` was run against.
+
+## Reproducing
+
+```sh
+curl -sSL -o <slug>.html "https://adr-ontario.ca/<slug>/"
+node extract.mjs <slug>.html > <slug>.txt
+```
+
+The five slugs are listed in the provenance table of `../adrio-designations.md`,
+which also carries each file's raw-HTML byte count and `sha256`.
+
+**Expect small differences in the character totals if you re-implement the
+extraction.** Both review agents reproduced every digest, every byte count and
+every term count exactly; one got 1924 / 2806 / 4121 / 3510 / 2496 characters
+against this script's 1932 / 2814 / 4151 / 3524 / 2504, because tag-stripping
+inserts whitespace differently. **The term counts are the finding; the character
+totals are only a size indicator.**
+
+⚠️ **The digests are valid until ADRIO's next WordPress plugin update.** The
+served HTML carries 17 `?ver=` strings that are static plugin versions today
+(`?ver=1.3.12`, `?ver=2.3.2`, …) — which is *why* these pages hash reproducibly
+where the LAT pages could not. Those strings will move when ADRIO updates a
+plugin. **A future digest mismatch is most likely a plugin bump, not tampering
+and not a changed designation name** — re-run the term counts before concluding
+anything from a mismatch.

docs/reference/adrio-extract/chartered-arbitrator-c-arb.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb) – The ADR Institute of Ontario
+Skip to content
+About
+About Us
+What is ADR?
+Resolve a Dispute
+ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+Rules & Codes
+ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+Event Calendar
+Webcasts – Recorded Events
+Approved Courses
+Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+Communities of Practice and Sections
+Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+Member Portal
+Benefits and Application Process
+Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+Insurance
+Rules & Codes
+FAQ
+Designations
+The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+ADRIC Accredited Courses
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+Insurance
+FAQ
+News & Blog
+Blog
+Updates
+Newsletter
+ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+President’s Circle
+ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+About
+- About Us
+- What is ADR?
+- Resolve a Dispute
+- ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+- Rules & Codes
+- ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+- Event Calendar
+- Webcasts - Recorded Events
+- Approved Courses
+- Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+- Communities of Practice and Sections
+- Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+- Member Portal
+- Benefits and Application Process
+- Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+- Insurance
+- Rules & Codes
+- FAQ
+Designations
+- The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+- ADRIC Accredited Courses
+- Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+- Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+- Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+- Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+- Insurance
+- FAQ
+News & Blog
+- Blog
+- Updates
+- Newsletter
+- ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+- President’s Circle
+- ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+Please do not mail your applications to our head office. Please email your application to membership@adr-ontario.ca
+1. What is a Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb) designation?
+The C.Arb Or Chartered Arbitrator designation is Canada’s only official designation for practising Arbitrators. Please click here for a more complete description of the requirements can be found.
+2. Are there prerequisites?
+The applicant must be a member of the ADR Institute of Ontario™ (or any other regional association).
+There are extensive training and experience requirements which you should review before applying.
+3. Where do I get the C.Arb Application Form?
+The C.Arb application form is linked below.
+4. Is there a fee for the C.Arb application?
+Yes, the Application Fee is $500.00 (plus HST). This covers the costs of administering the accreditation process. This is a one-time application fee.
+5. Is there an ongoing cost?
+There is an annual fee to maintain your C.Arb designation. The national organization bills you every year. You must also remain a member in good standing with the ADR Institute of Ontario™ to retain this designation.
+6. How do I apply?
+Forward your completed application form, and payment along with any attachments necessary to verify the courses you have taken and the work you have done (think of it as marketing yourself to the accreditation committee), to:
+Please do not mail your applications to our head office. Please email your application to membership@adr-ontario.ca
+(Looking for courses that have been pre-approved to qualify for designation applications? Click here .)
+View C.Arb Application Form
+View C.Arb Criteria
+Theme by Think Up Themes Ltd . Powered by WordPress .

docs/reference/adrio-extract/chartered-med-arbitrator-c-med-arb.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb) – The ADR Institute of Ontario
+Skip to content
+About
+About Us
+What is ADR?
+Resolve a Dispute
+ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+Rules & Codes
+ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+Event Calendar
+Webcasts – Recorded Events
+Approved Courses
+Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+Communities of Practice and Sections
+Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+Member Portal
+Benefits and Application Process
+Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+Insurance
+Rules & Codes
+FAQ
+Designations
+The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+ADRIC Accredited Courses
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+Insurance
+FAQ
+News & Blog
+Blog
+Updates
+Newsletter
+ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+President’s Circle
+ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+About
+- About Us
+- What is ADR?
+- Resolve a Dispute
+- ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+- Rules & Codes
+- ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+- Event Calendar
+- Webcasts - Recorded Events
+- Approved Courses
+- Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+- Communities of Practice and Sections
+- Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+- Member Portal
+- Benefits and Application Process
+- Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+- Insurance
+- Rules & Codes
+- FAQ
+Designations
+- The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+- ADRIC Accredited Courses
+- Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+- Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+- Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+- Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+- Insurance
+- FAQ
+News & Blog
+- Blog
+- Updates
+- Newsletter
+- ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+- President’s Circle
+- ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+Med-Arb is a distinct, innovative standalone process that is not as well known or understood by consumers of ADR services compared to mediation and arbitration.
+Med-Arb is not merely the merging of separate mediation and arbitration processes, but a unique process designed to meet the needs of particular disputants. It involves nuances and complexities that can be fine-tuned to the needs of the parties as a customized dispute resolution process, which requires a high level of practitioner competence to do successfully.
+To read more about the C.Med-Arb designation, including how to apply, click here .
+Theme by Think Up Themes Ltd . Powered by WordPress .

docs/reference/adrio-extract/chartered-mediator-c-med.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+Chartered Mediator (C.Med) – The ADR Institute of Ontario
+Skip to content
+About
+About Us
+What is ADR?
+Resolve a Dispute
+ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+Rules & Codes
+ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+Event Calendar
+Webcasts – Recorded Events
+Approved Courses
+Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+Communities of Practice and Sections
+Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+Member Portal
+Benefits and Application Process
+Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+Insurance
+Rules & Codes
+FAQ
+Designations
+The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+ADRIC Accredited Courses
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+Insurance
+FAQ
+News & Blog
+Blog
+Updates
+Newsletter
+ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+President’s Circle
+ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+About
+- About Us
+- What is ADR?
+- Resolve a Dispute
+- ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+- Rules & Codes
+- ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+- Event Calendar
+- Webcasts - Recorded Events
+- Approved Courses
+- Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+- Communities of Practice and Sections
+- Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+- Member Portal
+- Benefits and Application Process
+- Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+- Insurance
+- Rules & Codes
+- FAQ
+Designations
+- The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+- ADRIC Accredited Courses
+- Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+- Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+- Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+- Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+- Insurance
+- FAQ
+News & Blog
+- Blog
+- Updates
+- Newsletter
+- ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+- President’s Circle
+- ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+Please do not mail your applications to our head office. Please email your application to membership@adr-ontario.ca
+1. What is a Chartered Mediator (C.Med) designation?
+The “C.Med” or “Chartered Mediator” designation is Canada’s most senior official designation for practising mediators.
+Clarification re Footnote #4 in the C.Med Criteria “The intended interpretation of Footnote #4 relating to a “Paid Mediation” is as follows: The criteria in Footnote #4 is intended to be applied individually to each of the 15 mediations presented by the applicant, and specifically where a mediation is not fee-paid, the RCMAC shall look at whether the mediation is demonstrably complex and involved, and may at its discretion accept the mediation being considered toward the 15 total mediations. There is no specific minimum number of fee paid mediations of the 15 total mediations required, providing this criteria is applied to each unpaid mediation.”
+Use the Application for Chartered Mediator designation linked below.
+2. Are there prerequisites?
+The applicant must be a member of the ADR Institute of Ontario™.
+There are extensive training and experience requirements which you should review before you consider applying.
+3. Is there a fee for the C.Med application?
+Yes, the Application Fee is $500.00 (plus HST) made payable to the ADR Institute of Ontario, Inc. This covers the costs of administering the accreditation process. This is a one-time application fee.
+4. Is there an ongoing cost?
+Yes. There is an annual fee to maintain your C.Med designation, payable to ADR Institute of Canada, Inc. The national organization bills you every year. You must also remain a member in good standing with the ADR Institute of Ontario™ to retain this designation.
+6. How do I apply?
+Forward your completed application form along with any attachments necessary to verify the courses you have taken and the work you have done (think of it as marketing yourself to the accreditation committee), to:
+Please do not mail your applications to our head office. Please email your application to membership@adr-ontario.ca
+(Looking for courses that have been pre-approved to qualify for designation applications? Click here .)
+View C.Med Application Form
+View C.Med Criteria
+Theme by Think Up Themes Ltd . Powered by WordPress .

docs/reference/adrio-extract/extract.mjs

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+import { readFileSync } from 'node:fs';
+const raw = readFileSync(process.argv[2], 'utf8');
+let t = raw
+  .replace(/<script\b[\s\S]*?<\/script>/gi, ' ')
+  .replace(/<style\b[\s\S]*?<\/style>/gi, ' ')
+  .replace(/<noscript\b[\s\S]*?<\/noscript>/gi, ' ')
+  .replace(/<!--[\s\S]*?-->/g, ' ')
+  .replace(/<[^>]+>/g, ' ');
+const ents = { amp:'&', lt:'<', gt:'>', quot:'"', apos:"'", nbsp:' ', ndash:'–', mdash:'—', rsquo:'’', lsquo:'‘', ldquo:'“', rdquo:'”' };
+t = t.replace(/&([a-zA-Z]+);/g, (m,n)=> n in ents ? ents[n] : m)
+     .replace(/&#(\d+);/g, (_m,d)=> String.fromCodePoint(+d))
+     .replace(/&#x([0-9a-f]+);/gi, (_m,h)=> String.fromCodePoint(parseInt(h,16)));
+t = t.replace(/[ \t ]+/g,' ').replace(/\s*\n\s*/g,'\n').replace(/\n{2,}/g,'\n').trim();
+process.stdout.write(t);

docs/reference/adrio-extract/professional-designations.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+Professional Designations – The ADR Institute of Ontario
+Skip to content
+About
+About Us
+What is ADR?
+Resolve a Dispute
+ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+Rules & Codes
+ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+Event Calendar
+Webcasts – Recorded Events
+Approved Courses
+Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+Communities of Practice and Sections
+Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+Member Portal
+Benefits and Application Process
+Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+Insurance
+Rules & Codes
+FAQ
+Designations
+The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+ADRIC Accredited Courses
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+Insurance
+FAQ
+News & Blog
+Blog
+Updates
+Newsletter
+ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+President’s Circle
+ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+About
+- About Us
+- What is ADR?
+- Resolve a Dispute
+- ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+- Rules & Codes
+- ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+- Event Calendar
+- Webcasts - Recorded Events
+- Approved Courses
+- Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+- Communities of Practice and Sections
+- Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+- Member Portal
+- Benefits and Application Process
+- Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+- Insurance
+- Rules & Codes
+- FAQ
+Designations
+- The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+- ADRIC Accredited Courses
+- Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+- Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+- Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+- Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+- Insurance
+- FAQ
+News & Blog
+- Blog
+- Updates
+- Newsletter
+- ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+- President’s Circle
+- ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+Professional Designations
+To read more about the path to designations, click here .
+Theme by Think Up Themes Ltd . Powered by WordPress .

docs/reference/adrio-extract/qualified-mediator-q-med-qualified-arbitrator-q-arb.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb) – The ADR Institute of Ontario
+Skip to content
+About
+About Us
+What is ADR?
+Resolve a Dispute
+ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+Rules & Codes
+ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+Event Calendar
+Webcasts – Recorded Events
+Approved Courses
+Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+Communities of Practice and Sections
+Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+Member Portal
+Benefits and Application Process
+Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+Insurance
+Rules & Codes
+FAQ
+Designations
+The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+ADRIC Accredited Courses
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+Insurance
+FAQ
+News & Blog
+Blog
+Updates
+Newsletter
+ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+President’s Circle
+ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+About
+- About Us
+- What is ADR?
+- Resolve a Dispute
+- ADRIO Board of Directors and Staff
+- Rules & Codes
+- ADRIO DEI Policy Framework
+Professional Development
+- Event Calendar
+- Webcasts - Recorded Events
+- Approved Courses
+- Lead a Professional Development Workshop with us!
+Sections
+- Communities of Practice and Sections
+- Committees
+Membership & Benefits
+- Member Portal
+- Benefits and Application Process
+- Practical Ethics for Working Mediators
+- Insurance
+- Rules & Codes
+- FAQ
+Designations
+- The Path to your Professional ADR designation
+- ADRIC Accredited Courses
+- Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+- Chartered Mediator (C.Med)
+- Chartered Arbitrator (C.Arb)
+- Chartered Med-Arbitrator (C.Med-Arb)
+- Insurance
+- FAQ
+News & Blog
+- Blog
+- Updates
+- Newsletter
+- ADRIO E-Mailing List Signup
+- President’s Circle
+- ADRIO STAR Award Recipients
+Contact & Staff
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) & Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) / Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb)
+These designations are to recognize practitioners who have completed sufficient mediation / arbitration and related dispute resolution training to be qualified to practice. They are an intermediate step for practitioners working to receive their Chartered designation.
+Please do not mail your applications to our head office. Please email your application to membership@adr-ontario.ca
+(Looking for courses that have been pre-approved to qualify for designation applications? Click here .)
+Read more by downloading the following resources:
+Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb) Requirements
+Qualified Arbitrator (Q.Arb) Application Form
+Qualified Mediator (Q.Med) Criteria and Application Form*
+*Q.Med criteria vary across affiliates. For the criteria specific to Ontario, be sure to read the checklist on the application form.
+Theme by Think Up Themes Ltd . Powered by WordPress .