A.1.CSD:10 - Conditional Consumer Boundary
The core account ends before stronger neighboring claims. Continue only when the next question is current:
| Next question | Continue through |
|---|---|
| Does evidence support a retained claim, and may it be relied on now? | A.10, with C.27 for temporal adequacy and B.3 for assurance. |
| Does a claimed effect, intervention, or counterfactual have adequate causal support? | C.28. |
| Does a mathematical scale, aggregation, optimization, or representation lens preserve what the receiver needs? | C.29; use C.30.ILC only for a current cross-scope architecture residual. |
| Would a particular further inquiry warrant its full attainable burden? | C.11.DUA; A.15.9 for a selected outside-practice contribution. |
| How does a finite configuration change compare, and what is chosen? | C.11.CRC, then C.11. |
| Does a later question concern value, benefit, harm, responsibility, admissible sacrifice, or an actual interlevel conflict? | Enter through D.1; use D.2 for multilevel entry, D.3 for an actual conflict description, D.4 for mediation or decision use, and D.5 for its bounded audits. |
For the last branch, one admissible D.1 value-frame edition is multilevel holonic consequentialism: inspect consequences for every constructively identified affected holon without automatic priority for a person, collection, or larger whole. That frame is conditional and plural under D.1. It adds no field to the A.1.CSD account. Establish any conflict, priority, or decision claim under its direct pattern.