THE PUBLIC RECORD

Method & corrections.

How the text was made, how it has been checked, what changed — and how to challenge it.

The Constitution is a draft, not a revelation. This page records how it was made, how it has been checked, what changed, and how to challenge it.

Last updated 24 October 2026

How the text was drafted

The Upgrade began with a simple claim: a constitution written for an agrarian republic cannot be patched forever to meet concentrated wealth, machine-speed information and a planetary emergency. The text was drafted, edited and attacked in public view — by humans, with AI assistance disclosed and bounded. AI helped produce drafts, find contradictions, cross-check citations and build the plain-language layer; humans decided every contested question and remain responsible for the result.

The design rests on three planks — politics by lot, a ceiling on wealth, and rights that cannot be bought — and on a fourth, quieter choice: power must be dispersed even among the people who agree with you. That is why the document contains counter-majoritarian devices, a non-derogable core, and an Enduring Core that even a supermajority cannot amend away.

The plain-language layer

Every legal clause has a plain-English rendering alongside it, and every plain statement carries a citation to the clause it summarises — 84 plain blocks in all. The legal text controls; the plain text is a reading aid for the people who have to live under it, not a second constitution. You can read either register, or both, on the Constitution page.

How it has been checked

No draft of this length can be trusted because it says it is right. It has to be tested. The project uses layered checks, and the results are summarised here rather than hidden:

Continuous

Structural gates: every internal reference resolves, every section has an id, no residue or forbidden markers remain, and the plain register stays traceable to the legal text.

Continuous

Cross-version checks: every plain statement must map to a clause; no plain-language claim may add, drop or change a legal figure. These checks currently report zero unresolved references and zero figure drift.

First full audit — 2026

Article-by-article audits of rights, economy and governance, with each finding recorded as applied, declined with reasons, or resolved by an author-directed decision.

Second and third audits — 2026

A complete cross-check of the whole text and both registers, and a second full pass after corrections. The third audit closed 100 findings and produced the current version of the text.

18 Oct 2026

Author-directed decisions were applied to contested readings — among them the capital-flight reconciliation and the cohort-rotation arithmetic.

19 Oct 2026

An external review (Argon’s Audit) checked both registers end to end. 36 of its 37 findings were confirmed and applied: the civic-detention continuation rule, the levy flow order, the emergency grace-period structure, the cohort sizes and the plain-language drift among them. The 37th — a fixed 15-Judge Tribunal — was declined, then resolved by adopting a flexible size fixed by law with safeguards against court-packing.

What is still open

A public document should say what it does not yet know. The following are deliberately open, and will be resolved in public:

The sign-up provider. The interest list currently opens on Google Forms. Whether to move it to a first-party form is an open decision, and will be disclosed here if it changes.
Measurement. The site uses Google Analytics 4 to count visits and see which pages and links are used — third-party analytics, disclosed in full on the Privacy page. We added no advertising trackers and no social pixels, and we do not use the analytics to follow readers around the web.

The correction policy

These rules apply to every correction, from a typo to a constitutional objection:

Quote the text. A correction must identify the article, section and exact words at issue.
Check the source. Findings are verified against the legal text before anything changes.
Fix the legal text first. The plain-language layer is then conformed to it; the reading aid never silently changes the law.
Record declines. A finding that is not accepted is recorded with the reason. “We disagree” is a reason; silence is not.
No silent edits. Changes are applied through asserted, reversible passes, and the public record of what changed is kept with the project.
Adversarial review is welcome. The most useful corrections are the ones that find a contradiction the drafters missed.

Report a correction

How to send one

Include the section, the quote, what you think it should say, and — where possible — the source or argument. Corrections are read by humans; AI is used to help check them, not to dismiss them.

Send corrections to aequitasupgrade@gmail.com. Include the section, the exact words, and what you think it should say. If email is not possible, use the interest form and mark your message “correction”, or raise the point publicly with the section and quote.

Read the record, not the claim

The full legal text is published in full. The plain-language view is one link away. The FAQ answers the common objections; the About page explains who is behind the project and how it is funded. If something here does not match the text, the text wins — and the correction is welcome.