Define how 'aboutness' is scored and weighted, the confidence thresholds for auto-approve vs user-shown-relatedness vs reject, the appeals path, and anti-gaming gates.
Why this matters
Entry 028 commits to AI-first, weighted verification of external-reference ties. The policy underneath is unresolved:
- Scoring and weighting — the relatedness model and how its output maps to a strength tier (Entry 020). "Strongly about" vs "mentions in passing" should rank differently on the entity page.
- Thresholds — confidence bands for auto-approve, ask-the-user-to-show- relatedness, and reject. What evidence a member supplies in the fallback (a quote, a timestamp, a note).
- Appeals — recourse when a tie is rejected or quarantined, and who adjudicates (ties to the human-in-loop role of Entry 022).
- Quarantine criteria — what failing re-evaluation means, creator notification, and the remediation path back to verified.
- Anti-gaming — tie-spam to farm entity-page visibility. Reuse the LoreLine-style quality gate (Entry 010: new voices filtered, credit-weighted surfacing) and Sybil resistance (G-004).