The essence of this text
Staying current does not mean rewriting the past. It means showing what changed, why, by whom and when.
This current guide brings together DÇM sources visible to everyone and decisions suitable for publication. It does not expose personal data or raw working notes. It explains the method, what changed and verified lessons; the Turkish reference PDF remains unchanged.
Why is the notebook updated?
The DÇM‑0.3 notebook began on 5 September 2026 to keep the measurement dictionary, justice checks, scenario outcomes and application rules in one change history. Settled principles are explained in the Reading Area; detailed rules enter the laboratory.
A new finding does not silently replace an earlier case or decision. The current proposal, its previous form, the reason for change, effective date and need for reassessment remain visible as separate records.
Four ledgers connected through events
The commitment ledger records promises, the contribution ledger what happened, the rights-and-payments ledger the resulting counterpart and payment state, and the decision ledger the adopted rule and its reasons. A chat message alone is not an active decision.
The engine’s deeper memory keeps contribution events, evidence, reviews, Justice Gates, decisions and objections connected but distinct. A correction can therefore be appended as a new event without silently rewriting the first record.
DÇM‑0.2 was preserved, while its decision role was frozen
DÇM‑0.2 remains the read-only numerical reference for the first ten scenarios. DÇM‑0.3 can run the same input with its newer justice checks and show both outcomes side by side. The older version does not make new decisions or replace the active proposal.
CAL‑001 records that the first round did not change the weights. Progress came instead through applicability, evidence, multiple review, gates, visibility, objection and a traceable version history.
An append-only event trail
When status, score, scope, channel or evidence changes, the previous value remains. A new event carries the new value, reason, acting role, time, rule version and notification record. Objections remain in the same chain from opening through independent review and decision to correction or confirmation.
A new invoice, conflicting evidence, relationship disclosure, safety event or participant objection can reopen a gate. A previous passed state does not silence the new information; the new review points back to the earlier record.
When should a new version be discussed?
A threshold or weight does not change by intuition alone. At least ten anonymised real events across different contribution types should be reviewed through two independent perspectives, with counter-examples and the effect on different people made visible.
A proposal, a pilot decision and an active rule are not the same. An adopted change needs a version number, reasons, scope, effective date and a statement of which earlier records—if any—must be reviewed again.
Public accountability and privacy belong together
The Reading Area can publish the method, version differences, scenario lessons and public verification outcomes. Sensitive invoices, health information, personal finances, private contracts, security detail and third-party data do not become public.
A contributor should see the criteria, reasons, evidence summary and change trail affecting their own record. Transparency does not mean every person sees every raw document; it means the decision has a sufficient, reviewable explanation.
Reflect together
Which record chain will let us explain six months from now why a decision made today changed?
Form your own answer first. Then identify where explanation, objection or a new practical test is needed.
Bring your note into the app ↗Dayanisma_Cemberi_Motoru_Kulliyat_0_3.pdf
Updated record · since 5 September 2026
Authored English web guide: 6 September 2026.
The public Turkish PDF remains unchanged; new decisions suitable for publication are added to this guide.