[limen ORG-social-organ-charter-0704] Charter the social organ as an institution rivaling a civic/community institution + relationship support ('relationship gurus')#628
Conversation
… institution + relationship support ('relationship gurus')
limen task ORG-social-organ-charter-0704
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: b05433e22b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| | **Relationship Analyst** | converts messy context into posture: active, warm, dormant, strained, broken, or protected; names what changed and why | engagement YAML + generated brief | Human confirms the standing; posture is not a value judgment | | ||
| | **Cadence Clerk** | tracks expected reply windows, check-ins, gratitude, care patterns, owed replies, anniversaries, and dormant ties | `standard.*` fields; future triage report | Human approves cadence changes and can cancel reminders | | ||
| | **Correspondence Steward** | drafts replies, invitations, apologies, introductions, gratitude notes, and care actions from the posture record | staged text only; no current auto-send integration | Human reviews, edits, sends, or discards | | ||
| | **Boundary Sentinel** | blocks work that violates no-contact, no-sharing, no-introduction, privacy, or manual-mode rules | `governance.*`, `validate-social.py` | Human sets boundaries; sentinel enforces them structurally | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mark boundary blocking as future/manual
For staged drafts, reminders, cadence changes, or community rules, this row presents boundary blocking as a current structural capability backed by governance.* and validate-social.py. I checked the current enforcement surface: validate-social.py only validates engagement YAML fields and required governance metadata; it does not consume proposed actions or detect whether a draft/reminder violates no-contact, no-sharing, no-introduction, or privacy boundaries. Because this charter is used as the build/operating spec for a safety-sensitive social organ, downstream agents can incorrectly treat unsafe outputs as already blocked unless this is marked as manual/future work or a real action-level checker is added.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| Until a generator exists, this can be run manually from the same YAML fields. It must not create | ||
| outbound action; it only prepares a review queue. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add due fields before claiming manual triage works
This says the weekly triage can already be run manually from the existing YAML fields, but the current engagement schema only has free-text expected_cadence, reply_window, and owed_replies; it has no last-contact/reply timestamps, due dates, or standing-change timestamps to determine whether care or replies are actually overdue. A downstream agent following this charter would have to invent recency facts or sort from insufficient data, so either the needed fields should be specified/added before this claim or the manual-triage statement should be narrowed.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
Autonomous limen dispatch of task
ORG-social-organ-charter-0704.In organvm/limen organs/social/, write CHARTER.md: the org-chart of AI roles (the 'virtual firm/team'), the workflows it runs, its inputs/outputs, and exactly how it gives one person the institutional weight of a civic/community institution + relationship support ('relationship gurus'). Concrete and buildable. No invented capabilities. CONSTRAINT: named by him, unscoped. [organ-backlog 2026-07-04: rank 8, maturity 5% stage scaffold — convert idle fleet capacity into institutional weight (VLTIMA).]
Produced in an isolated worktree off origin — review before merge.