Accountability
Adopted on this site — consequences require a name attached
Every consequential commitment must be attributable to a named authority who accepted responsibility at a documented moment.
Adopted on this site. A public theme, not an unpublished prime. I commit to it through the commitment-boundary argument in Genesis and the commitment requires authority principle.
Accountability is not blame culture. It is the architectural requirement that consequential effects trace to someone — or some certified process — that decided, on known evidence, under known policy, at a known moment. Before the commitment boundary, the system computes. After it, the world has changed because an authority committed.
Diffuse accountability is indistinguishable from none. “The system decided” with no named authority is recognised as a gap, not an acceptable outcome. Rubber-stamp approval, silent promotion of model output to committed fact, and accountability without commitment are failure modes precisely because they violate this value.
Accountability serves H0: Humane Core by keeping power legible. People can appeal, review, and learn when commitments are explicit and contestable. They cannot when consequences emerge from opaque pipelines with no boundary and no name.