Generated from the maintained method library. Read or download equivalent Markdown.

Reviewing and Challenging the Legant Method

Status / authority: Current public review route
Effective date: 2026-08-05
Dependencies: README.md; LEGANT_METHOD_REFERENCE.md; current framework and protocol sources
Supersedes: Ad hoc review instructions shared separately with individual readers

This library is open for reading and challenge. It is read-only because these same files are the maintained canon. External comments do not become methodology changes by proximity.

Recommended route

1. Read LEGANT_METHOD_REFERENCE.md for current architecture, then METHOD_ARCHITECTURE_DETAIL.md for step/alignment depth. The published Method page is downstream presentation.
2. Read LEGANT_METHOD_REFERENCE.md for the detailed map, evidence boundary, addressable claims, related writing, and source routing.
3. Follow the detailed source for any framework or protocol you want to test.
4. Use legacy ARC files only when comparing the current method with its historical form.

A useful agent brief

Ask an agent for a short report that includes:

• its map of the method in plain language;
• the strongest claim or distinction it finds;
• the strongest challenge, contradiction, or missing alternative;
• the exact file, heading, and claim ID involved;
• the evidence or outside framework that creates the challenge;
• what observation, comparison, or test could resolve it; and
• up to three related Chris essays from the library that a human reader may want to read.

Separate three kinds of feedback:

1. Misunderstanding: the library did not make the intended meaning retrievable.
2. Internal inconsistency: two current sources, terms, or process claims conflict.
3. Substantive challenge: the method is understandable, but the claim, boundary, evidence, or alternative does not hold up.

Do not infer private client evidence, operational skills, or production mechanics from their absence here. They are outside the public library by design.

Return channel

Send the review as a document or email to c@thezag.com. Cite the file and heading; use a Claim ID where one exists. Google Drive comments are not the review route.

Chris decides whether a challenge changes the method. Accepted changes are applied to the canonical source and recorded in CHANGELOG.md; rejected or unresolved challenges may remain open without being erased.