resolve-dispute

A review finding is stuck. Structure its resolution in three steps. **Step 1 — Frame the dispute.** Identify and state aloud: - The disputed finding (one sentence) - Who holds it - The facilitator's prior arbitration ruling (one sentence) **Step 2 — Send the reviewer this message, substituting `[finding]` with the actual finding:** > Your finding — [finding] — was arbitrated. To keep it open, you must provide ONE of: > (a) A concrete failure scenario: specific inputs or conditions that produce wrong behavior > (b) A source citation: file, line number, and what it shows > (c) A direct counterexample to the arbitration reasoning > > One response. No response counts as concession. After that, the facilitator rules and the finding is DECIDED. **Step 3 — Rule and tag.** After the reviewer responds: - Evidence present → the facilitator evaluates it on the merits and rules. Tag the finding DECIDED regardless of outcome. - No evidence → the facilitator tags DECIDED, asks the reviewer to re-score. - No response → the facilitator tags DECIDED. DECIDED findings cannot be re-raised without new substance. This enforces the existing "Don't regurgitate decided points" rule. **What this skill must not do:** - Override a finding backed by real evidence - Auto-resolve — the facilitator still decides after hearing the evidence - Apply to first-round disagreements — use normal arbitration first - Suppress legitimate concerns — evidence always reopens the door