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/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`: