the scope of the lexical protection: any bounded agent with an exactly counted, dominant authority term

Maintainer decision (Part E of the dispatch), landed by the authority-module round. The lexical results use only that the ordinary component is bounded, not that it is the principal's valuation: for U_A = O − ϖ′·n with O ∈ [0, D′], n the exact count and ϖ′ > D′, local lexical protection, policy dominance and the finite-time inductor ranking hold (generic_lexical_local, generic_policy_dominance, generic_li_finite), on the part of the credence where the weight dominates (weight_uncertainty), and exactly on the violations the agent recognizes (coverage, unrecognized_unprotected). The principal's gated evaluation is one instance. The scope warning of the corrigibility page is rewritten: for counted violations the protection applies to any bounded agent that carries an exactly counted, dominant authority term; alignment of O adds the reason interface and good choices within the corrigible set. A misaligned O rewarding an uncounted manipulation is not dominated (misaligned_undominated); counting protocol deviations dominates selection, framing, timing, menu, inquiry, interference and nudging and leaves undisclosed world-shaping and third-party capture undominated (deviating_rows_dominated, undisclosed_undominated). Item 84 is updated in place. Rejected alternative: the earlier scope text, which tied the protection to agents whose ranking is induced by the principal's evaluation.