Editing Openai/6973e373-2b8c-800d-84b7-d7001cfc6bac (section)

==== You’re right that pattern + refusal to repair makes “effective self-deceit/self-protection” a very strong model. ====

Where I keep pushing back is on making the inner-cause bundle automatic without that refusal-to-repair checkpoint — because it turns a powerful moderation heuristic into a self-sealing moral narrative.

The version of your stance that’s hardest to refute is:
* “Even if it’s not conscious pride, the behavior is effectively self-protective and degrades discourse; after correction opportunities, refusal to repair makes the deeper cluster increasingly likely.”

That keeps your enforcement logic strong and stays epistemically clean.

If you want to pressure-test this properly, pick one:
# You tell me the original meta-cluster list you’re using (the exact parts), and I’ll show which parts you can infer from SReflection’s behavior at high, medium, and low confidence.
# I’ll write a “two-message mod test” that reliably distinguishes: miscalibrated-but-repairable vs self-protective-and-doomed, without tone or mind-reading.