Loomworks — GRANTHA supersession, the four inherited documents — amendment instructions — v0.1

Version. 0.1 Date. 2026-08-06 Author. Claude.ai (drafting session). Operator: Marvin Percival. Grounding. investigations/loomworks-grantha-correction-note-second-pass-v0_2, which named these four and their verbatim text. Produces. Four version bumps. No document is edited in place; each prior version stands as a sibling.

Why this is being done now rather than at each document's next bump.

The 2026-07-29 correction note said its four documents were correctable at their next version bump. None was corrected, and this whole arc exists because nobody went back. The second-pass note repeated the same phrase about these four. Saying it a second time and walking away would be the same failure, deliberately.

And each fix is one or two lines. The cost of doing them now is smaller than the cost of tracking them.

The standard, per Operator direction 2026-08-06: GRANTHA and OVA are named by placement, not function. Every replacement below names which seat each occupies and stops there.

1 — scoping-notes/loomworks-c5-scoping-note-domain-reference-model-v0_1 → v0.2

The most urgent of the four. The domain layer is unbuilt, and C5 scoping is the next thing that would consume this document — against the wrong model.

Copy to loomworks-c5-scoping-note-domain-reference-model-v0_2.md. Replace, at line 40:

> Restricted by exception — an ACL established through OVA, after which OVA governs reach.

With:

> Restricted by exception — placed under grant, after which GRANTHA governs reach.

Add to the version block:

> Amendment note (v0.2). Corrects the restricting mechanism. v0.1 named an access-control list established through OVA; Architecture Decision J1 (June 2026) placed GRANTHA in the authorization seat, with OVA beneath it, and restriction is by grant rather than by list. How a grant works is GRANTHA's own specification to govern. Nothing else in this note changes — the domain reference model, the membership-versus-reference distinction, and the open-by-default posture are unaffected by which substrate enforces reach. (Prior position preserved: v0.1 stands as a sibling.)

2 — verticals/venture-diligence/venture-diligence-candidate-seed-v0_2 → v0.3

The most serious of the four, because its claim carries a verification stamp.

Copy to venture-diligence-candidate-seed-v0_3.md. Replace, at line 77:

> Verified state (engine inspection, 2026-07-28): reach restriction is a committed seed posture — open by default, restricted by access-control list through OVA.

With:

> Verified state (engine inspection, 2026-07-28; access mechanism re-verified 2026-08-06): reach restriction is a committed seed posture — open by default, restricted by placing the scope under grant, with GRANTHA governing reach.

Add to the version block:

> Amendment note (v0.3). Corrects the access mechanism. The v0.2 claim was verified correctly and against a stale source — seed v0.12 did commit to an access-control list through OVA, and Architecture Decision J1 had already replaced that seat two months earlier without the seed absorbing it. Seed v0.13 and v0.14 (2026-08-06) corrected it. The verification was sound; the document it verified against was not, which is why the re-verification date is now stated alongside the original. Nothing else changes — the vertical's substance, its diligence posture, and its isolation claim are unaffected.

> [EXECUTING SESSION: read line 77 in context before replacing. If the sentence sits inside a block whose surrounding text also names OVA or an ACL, report that block rather than editing only the one line — a corrected sentence beside an uncorrected paragraph is worse than neither.]

3 — verticals/venture-diligence/loomworks-vertical-venture-capital-diligence-v0_2 → v0.3

Copy to loomworks-vertical-venture-capital-diligence-v0_3.md. Replace, at line 112:

> The seed's Memory section carries two independent access axes — reach, open by default and OVA-restricted when an access-control list is established

With:

> The seed's Memory section carries two independent access axes — reach, open by default and restricted when the scope is placed under grant

[EXECUTING SESSION: the quotation above is truncated at an ellipsis in the source. Establish where the sentence actually ends and replace the whole clause, not the fragment.]

Add to the version block:

> Amendment note (v0.3). Corrects a report of what the seed's Memory section carries. v0.2 described the seed accurately as the seed then stood; Architecture Decision J1 had replaced the access-control-list model and the seed had not absorbed it. Seed v0.13 and v0.14 (2026-08-06) corrected it, and this note now reports the corrected commitment. Nothing else changes.

4 — investigations/loomworks-foray-operational-visibility-investigation-v0_1 → v0.2

Two spots, both in §4's Model 2 paragraph.

Copy to loomworks-foray-operational-visibility-investigation-v0_2.md. Replace:

> the fund is granted governed reach into a restricted scope: an access-control list naming the fund, shaped by an external-account discipline on the target's side.

With:

> the fund is granted governed reach into a restricted scope: a grant held by the fund, shaped by an external-account discipline on the target's side.

And replace:

> it needs Slice 3's reach enforcement, OVA-proper credentials, and cross-organization reference

With:

> it needs Slice 3's reach enforcement, GRANTHA-issued credentials, and cross-organization reference

Add to the version block:

> Amendment note (v0.2). Corrects the Model 2 access mechanism in §4. v0.1 described the fund's reach as an access-control list naming it, and its credentials as OVA-proper. Architecture Decision J1 placed GRANTHA in the authorization seat, with OVA beneath it, and restriction is by grant rather than by list. Model 2 remains unbuilt and remains the maturity direction — this corrects what it would be built on, not whether. Nothing else changes, including Model 1, the pilot design, and the three Operator decisions at §10.

Filing

Each new version goes beside its predecessor. Move nothing to archive/ — these are not seeds, and their directories do not use one. [EXECUTING SESSION: confirm that against each directory's existing layout before filing; if any of the four directories does archive, follow it.]

Produce HTML companions only where the predecessor has one. Match what is there rather than adding a form the document did not carry.

Verification checklist

1. Four new versions exist, each beside its predecessor, each with its amendment note.
2. All four predecessors are unmodified. Confirm by diff.
3. No new version contains a live commitment to an access-control list, or names OVA as the authorization seat. Sweep each for ACL, access-control list, access control list. Every remaining occurrence must be inside its own amendment note.
4. No new version describes how a grant works. Sweep for sole primitive, group object, holder-set, blind verification. Expect zero across all four.
5. Nothing else in any of the four changed. Diff each against its predecessor and confirm the only differences are the amendment note and the corrected clause or clauses.
6. Count the corrected clauses yourself. This document specifies five — one each in documents 1, 2 and 3, and two in document 4. If you find a sixth, that is a miss.
7. The second-pass correction note is not edited. It named these four and stands as the record of why; it now also stands as the record of a correction that was actually made rather than deferred.

DUNIN7 — Done In Seven LLC — Miami, Florida Loomworks — GRANTHA supersession, the four inherited documents — amendment instructions — v0.1 — 2026-08-06 The first note said "correctable at their next version bump." Nobody went back. This is going back.