feat: D19 bounds the review loop; apply nine rulings; close Q46(a) and Q48–Q53

D19 into §3 and swept to all six destinations Pouya named: both agent briefs
(scope + severity filter), /build Phases 2–4 (non-gating questions, scope, stop
signal, two-round cap), /wrap, and CLAUDE.md (comments record decisions, not
history). Sweep verified by command, not recalled.

Rulings applied:
  Q46(a) PUBLISHABLE — three §4 Offerings rows flipped; gate 1 records
         [Pouya's stated basis], never [verified]. Step 5 unblocked.
  Q48    closed, not site-relevant.
  Q49    one §4 row, "Mediator"; read as declining Q49(b), so worksFor stays out.
  Q50    DEVIATES — ships as name + slogan, not the concatenation. Flagged.
  Q51    OBA sections stay; the regulator/voluntary distinction recorded.
  Q52    docs/reference/deploy-credential-verification.md — 18 read-only AWS
         calls, re-run rather than transcribed, access key ID redacted.
  Q53    memberOf emitted on /about/'s Person node.

Two review rounds. The headline finding was this session's own: the Q53 sweep
was asserted and never run, leaving six in-scope records saying memberOf was
withheld — including §12 R10, which is read aloud every session. Round 2 then
found that round 1's simplification had put memberOf on / as well; the per-page
opt-in is restored, because Pouya's ruling turns on /about/'s visible HTML.

Also fixed: MEMBERSHIP_ORGS had orphaned BOUTIQUE's D16 JSDoc; /'s title now
derives from the constants; §7's deploy row stated and retracted three facts.

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

docs/01-architecture.md

@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ Revisit at month 12–18, once there is relationship history to point to.
 
 ## Not a practice area yet: tax-adjacent disputes
 
-**Canadian Tax Foundation membership is verified** (`AGENTS.md` §4, 2026-08-26)
+**Canadian Tax Foundation membership is verified** (`AGENTS.md` §4 — read the stamp there; a second copy of a currency stamp goes stale where nobody re-reads it, and this one had)
 and it is the one credential none of the six areas above touch. Tax-adjacent
 disputes are genuinely ADR territory — valuation and purchase-price disputes on
 a share sale, indemnity and earn-out fights that turn on a tax position,
@@ -260,17 +260,24 @@ Six cards, one paragraph each, linking onward. Also the natural home for the
 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.
+> ✅ **THE STRIP MAY SHIP — Q46(a) closed 2026-08-28, on Pouya's second
+> ruling.** All three §4 Offerings rows now read **PUBLISHABLE**. Read the ENE
+> row before writing the strip: gate 1 (*is the activity gated?*) is closed as
+> **`[Pouya's stated basis 2026-08-28]`** and **not** as `[verified]`, because no
+> source for any of the three exists in `docs/reference/`. That is a deliberate,
+> attributed position of the architect's, not a sourced fact — do not describe it
+> on the page or in a comment as settled law.
 >
-> 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.
+> **Two framing constraints survive the ruling and are not discretionary:**
+>
+> 1. **ENE is an assessment delivered to BOTH parties**, never advice to one. It
+>    is the offering nearest §4's NOT-NEGOTIABLE boundary — a neutral assessment
+>    of the *merits* sits closest to *"providing legal services"*.
+> 2. **Pre-dispute advisory carries a conflict caution**, and it is practice
+>    management rather than a publication gate: advisory work for one
+>    organisation can conflict against a later appointment in the same matter.
+>    **No copy may imply the offering is free of that tension** — this strip is
+>    where the temptation to imply it will arise.
 
 > **`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: