Words carry multiple senses; edges do not. An edge uses its endpoints **as their accepted definitions carve them** — and where the filer leans on a particular sense, the note must pin it. A judge judges the pinned sense: arguing a *different* sense of the same word is answering a different question, not refuting the claim. And when the disagreement IS about which sense the entry itself should carry, the defect is in the **definition**, not the edge — the move is a definition contest (mode REPLACE, Law 30), not an edge deadlock. *Establishing cases: the language edges (semiosis-vs-speech — and the court ruled 2026-07-20 that `language` keeps its BROAD accepted sense: "symbolic signs — vocal, gestural, or written"; sign systems qualify, and the speech-only reading is the contestable one), stereotype → cognitive-strategy (is a strategy deliberate?), loss → emotion (grief, ledger, or event?).*
III. Edges — the which-came-first test
Law 11d: One edge, one sense (ratified 2026-07-20).
Words carry multiple senses; edges do not. An edge uses its endpoints **as their accepted definitions carve them** — and where the filer leans on a particular sense, the note must pin it. A judge judges the pinned sense…
These are the human-readable bytes this deployment serves. Recorded amendments and dials plus content-addressed decision rules are the evidence of what it enforced.
The covered lawbook expression is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. Attribute it as “Systema Constructum lawbook — Jacob Baltz,” retain the license, and indicate changes. Copyright permission does not ratify the text or confer canonical authority.