{
  "canonicalUrl": "https://xn--mwe.com/contradictions/fork-continuity-vs-exclusive-identity/",
  "claimStatus": "OPEN POLICY QUESTION",
  "correctionStatus": "CURRENT K05 RELEASE",
  "id": "CON-K02-003",
  "lastReviewed": "2026-08-16",
  "machineRecordUrl": "https://xn--mwe.com/data/contradictions/fork-continuity-vs-exclusive-identity.json",
  "name": "Common continuity evidence versus exclusive single-identity rules",
  "propositionA": "Two branches can each retain strong causal continuity with a common predecessor.",
  "propositionB": "Some rights, votes, credentials and authorities cannot be exercised in duplicate.",
  "relationship": "Technical continuity evidence does not by itself resolve legal exclusivity or allocation.",
  "releaseId": "K12-2026-08-16",
  "researchCutoff": "2026-08-16",
  "resolution": "Record both continuity claims and suspend or allocate non-divisible authority under explicit due-process rules.",
  "resolutionStatus": "OPEN POLICY QUESTION",
  "slug": "fork-continuity-vs-exclusive-identity",
  "sourceIds": [],
  "sourceRevalidatedAt": "2026-08-15T23:00:00Z",
  "topic": "memory-continuity",
  "type": "Contradiction"
}