legitimacy parents are not the objects an exercise acts on

agent-decided, reversible. Re-rules the same day's entry below, which took all of an exercise's targets as its legitimacy parents on the evidence of a merge register. A cleanup register decides the other half: a regulator revoking a fraudulent warrant and granting a proper one acts on the fraudulent one and inherits from its own charter, and a rule reading the objects acted on makes the replacement illegitimate.

So the type splits. affected(t) is what the exercise acts on and constrains nothing; parents(t) is what its issue inherits entitlement from and must be derivable, all of it. The merge case is unchanged under the split, because there the manufactured warrant really is a parent.

In the record calculus a cleanup is a revocation plus a separate creation, and the creation inherits from its licence alone — so Reflective Integrity can express both and needed no widening.

Rejected alternative: one relation for both, which is what the round's first pass shipped.

Record: projects/normativity/legitimacy/rounds/2026-08-25-legitimate-evolution/COUNTERMODELS.md §2.