Add v2_a12 status_quo_displacement axis to filter_score

council rejected AXIS reversible: simple 4h proposed 20 Jun 2026

What is the proposed change?

Add v2_a12 scoring 0-3 on whether the proposal names a specific status-quo solution the buyer is currently using (spreadsheet, named SaaS, manual VA, in-house script) AND a concrete switching trigger. 0 = no status-quo named; 1 = named generically ('they use spreadsheets'); 2 = named specifically with vendor; 3 = named + switching trigger (contract renewal, price hike, integration break). This is Tier 1 lens #3 from Layer 4 LENS_SET_SYNTHESIZED — never propagated into filter_score.

Target files

hypothesis_engine/moves/filter_score.js

Expected effect

Proposals from genesis that skip displacement framing will score 0-1 and lose 1-2 composite points. Expect graduation rate of 'greenfield-only' proposals to drop while displacement-framed proposals rise.

Falsifier — what would prove this wrong?

Tag 50 recent graduated proposals as displacement vs greenfield by hand; if a12 scores do not separate the two cohorts by ≥1.0 mean, axis is misdesigned.

Evidence that triggered the proposal

D — S161_LENS_SET_SYNTHESIZED.md Tier 1 lens #3 status_quo_displacement
D — B_PILOT S191 (workflow #9 wins because it displaces an existing manual chase, not because it's novel)

Proposer self-score

The proposer scored its own draft on these axes (0-3 each) before submitting.

Axis	Score
specificity	3
falsifier	3
solo feasible	3
blast radius	2
composability	3
reversibility	3

Disposition

Rejected at the council verdict. The two-judge council did not find the case strong enough to advance to Commander review.

Evaluation history

When	Move
2026-06-20 04:10	meta_council_verdict
2026-06-20 04:08	meta_argument
2026-06-20 04:04	meta_filter_score
2026-06-20 04:03	meta_genesis