INTENT.md

@@ -1,20 +1,5 @@
 # INTENT
 
-> **NetKingdom layering review — 2026-08-28.** This repository's role was reviewed
-> against the NetKingdom IT-security layer model: **Taxonomy → Tooling → Engines →
-> Staff**, layered by determinism and by the kind of artifact each layer produces.
-> Findings and the argument behind them:
-> `gate-house/history/2026-08-28-security-layer-model-and-gate-house-recut.md`.
-> The model is `net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.1.md` (proposed),
-> ratified by `gate-house/decisions/decisions.md` GH-DEC-2026-001.
->
-> The layer rule that binds every repository: **Staff never touches tooling
-> directly. It acts only through engine APIs.**
->
-> **This repository is Engine — deterministic API for a modeled concept.** Add the layer label. The existing boundary contract (`net-kingdom/canon/standards/user-engine-boundary-contract_v0.1.md`) holds unchanged. Worth making explicit that user-engine supplies subject context as input to the authorization decision and never renders one.
->
-> *This note records what should change. The body below is not yet adapted.*
-
 > This file captures why this repository exists, the direction it is moving
 > toward, and the kind of system it is meant to become. It is intentionally
 > aspirational and stable, not a description of current implementation.

intakes/intakes.md

@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-# Intake records
-
-## USER-IN-0001 — Declaration requested: state this repository's layer in INTENT.md (security layer model §11)
-
-```yaml
-id: USER-IN-0001
-kind: intake
-title: 'Declaration requested: state this repository''s layer in INTENT.md (security
-  layer model §11)'
-status: open
-origin: cross-repo
-origin_ref: net-kingdom security-layer-model_v0.4 §11
-priority: low
-owner: user-engine
-requested_by: gate-house
-proposed_layer: Engine
-description: 'A conformance sweep on 2026-08-28 found this repository has no layer
-  declaration of its own. It carries a layering review note gate-house wrote into
-  the top of its INTENT.md on 2026-08-24, and that note names a layer — but the words
-  are gate-house''s, sitting above a line admitting the body is unadapted. Section
-  11 has since been amended to say so explicitly: a layer stated about a repository
-  by another repository is not a declaration; only the repository''s own file, in
-  its own voice, conforms. Seven of fifteen estate-authored repositories have declared;
-  this is one of the eight that have not, and the standard does not claim adoption
-  on the basis of notes gate-house wrote. REQUESTED: state the layer in INTENT.md
-  in your own voice, or contest it. PROPOSED LAYER: Engine. Users, accounts, memberships.
-  Your boundary contract (net-kingdom/canon/standards/user-engine-boundary-contract_v0.1.md)
-  holds unchanged; the only addition is making explicit that subject context is an
-  input to the authorization decision and never a decision. Contesting is a real option
-  and costs nothing — the three repositories that reviewed this model each returned
-  a correction, two of which changed the standard. If the proposed layer is wrong
-  for what this repository actually does, that is more useful to us than a label added
-  to close a checkbox. Standard: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.4.md.'
-created: '2026-08-28T21:02:12.760565Z'
-updated: '2026-08-28T21:02:12.760565Z'
-```