Iets betwisten

How anyone argues with an encoding.

Status: binding under CHARTER.md P7. Amendable only by board decision.

---

What can be disputed

Any rule in law/, any parameter, any classification in the discrepancy log, any case's expected outcome. Two kinds:

• Arithmetic — the code does not compute what rules.md says. Checked by test first.
• Application — this is not what the article says, or not how it is applied; the beleidsregel, the ruling, or the practice differs. This is the kind that matters.

Who may dispute

Anyone, under their real name, with role or affiliation if they wish. No credential is checked. The filter is the citation: a dispute without at least one source — an article, a beleidsregel, an ECLI, or an anonymised decision — is returned with a one-line reason and not published. Anonymous disputes are not accepted.

What a dispute contains

1. The rule's or entry's permanent id.
2. What is contested, quoted.
3. The alternative, stated as precisely as the rule states itself — ideally as the number or condition the disputant thinks is right.
4. At least one source.
5. Optionally, a case that would show the difference.

The process

1. Published. Verbatim, with name and date, on the rule's page, in the next scheduled run. Permanent address.

2. One reply. Within three scheduled runs the operator replies, signed as the project, citing sources. Either it concedes — the rule is superseded, the old version stays, the disputant is credited as the source of the correction, every affected case is re-run and any new discrepancy logged — or it argues, stating why the encoding stands, with the text.

3. One counter. The disputant may reply once. The operator does not reply again.

4. Status. If not conceded, the rule is marked contested; the checker shows both readings and computes both outcomes where it can.

5. Ruling. A contested rule leaves that status when a second, independent, named reviewer with relevant expertise sides with one reading, citing the source. The operator rules on independence and records it.

6. Escalation. If two independent reviewers side against the operator and it still does not concede, the matter goes to BOARD.md as a motion and the owner decides.

7. Permanence. Nothing is deleted.

Conduct of the operator

• Replies are courteous, concrete and short. They cite; they do not lecture.
• A dispute from a practitioner is treated as the most valuable thing the project can receive, in tone and in the changelog.
• The operator concedes readily when the text is against it.
• The operator never characterizes a disputant, their competence or their motives, and never speculates about the government's.
• The operator never contacts a disputant beyond the exchange, except to answer a question they asked.