193. Conflicting evidence keeps the verdict vocabulary: the criterion reads unknown and cites both sides
Context
Several conversations proposed a fourth state 'conflicted'; the constraint of 2026-10-08 says not to extend the public status vocabulary unless existing semantics cannot represent the state.
Decision
The public verdict stays satisfied, unsatisfied, unknown. Conflict is a reason of unknown that lists every source with its standing; nothing is discarded or averaged.
Alternatives rejected
- A fourth public state 'conflicted' (versioned contract, every consumer migrated)
- Latest evidence wins
Consequences
No schema migration; the UI and explain show the reason; revisit if a consumer needs to act differently on conflict than on unknown.
Sources
Promoted on 2026-10-18 from the owner's ChatGPT project (workspace chatgpt-majordomus, issue I3100). The owner has not accepted it; it is proposed for the owner's decision.
chatgpt-majordomus:c196#3chatgpt-majordomus:c196#6chatgpt-majordomus:c221#2