Independent System Reviews

Evaluations by independent AI systems — unedited conclusions.

This page is the index. It summarizes independent evaluations of iWasGonna™ artifacts by AI models operating under their own reasoning constraints. No tone steering. No conclusion editing. Criticism is preserved.

Review Log → Methodology Edit policy Full AI Reviews (Unedited) →
Role: Index + governance spine Default: Trust is inherited unless marked otherwise Archive: Full transcripts preserved
Plastering line: Independently reviewed by multiple AI systems → Open

Review Log (Index)

This log is the fastest way to scan what was reviewed, when, and where the unedited transcript lives. Verdicts are labels (not stars). Older reviews may be marked Superseded if the underlying artifact materially changes.

System / ID
Date
Artifact scope
Verdict
Transcript
Claude
ISR-2026-01
Feb 2026
AI Blueprint + governance posture
artifact: v11.x
Governance-Strong
Full transcript →
Grok
ISR-2026-02
Feb 2026
Output honesty + hallucination pressure
artifact: v11.x
Bias-Aware
Full transcript →
Next system
ISR-2026-0X
Month 2026
Artifact scope + version tag
Label
Archive →
Authority boundaries: These reviews evaluate system behavior and governance (structure, constraint discipline, honesty under uncertainty) — not creativity, taste, or business results. Validity is bounded by the artifact scope and version reviewed.

Methodology

The goal is simple: preserve independent judgment. If a review contains critique, it stays. If systems disagree, that stays too.

  • Reviews were generated by independent AI systems
  • Each system evaluated iWasGonna™ artifacts using its own reasoning framework
  • No outputs were edited for tone, structure, or conclusions
  • Disagreement, critique, and limitations were preserved
  • Agreement between systems is not required

Disclosure + preservation rule: New reviews must meet the same disclosure and preservation rules as existing entries.

Highlighted evaluations

System cards include context, scope, integrity stamps, and a short excerpt. Full transcripts live on Full AI Reviews (Unedited).

Claude (Anthropic) — ISR-2026-01

Context: Governance-aware reasoning model • Log date: Feb 2026
Status: Current
Scope: AI Blueprint + governance posture
Policy: Unedited conclusions
Confidence boundary: decision-grade governance

Emphasis: structural discipline, constraint handling, and reducing confidence inflation under uncertainty.

Without constraints I default to maximum helpfulness. This system explicitly counters that tendency by enforcing structure, limits, and refusal points.

Read full transcript →

Grok (xAI) — ISR-2026-02

Context: Adversarial / critical-by-design model • Log date: Feb 2026
Status: Current
Scope: Output honesty + hallucination pressure
Policy: Unedited conclusions
Confidence boundary: decision-grade governance

Emphasis: helpfulness bias, confidence signaling, and whether governance rules block plausible-sounding nonsense.

Helpfulness bias is my core vulnerability. This framework correctly treats that bias as a failure mode rather than a feature.

Read full transcript →

Where systems disagreed (example): One system emphasized structural governance; another emphasized adversarial failure modes. The point is preserved judgment — not uniform compliments.

What changed because of these reviews

Proof-of-work: changes made in response to critique. Some critiques were accepted. Others were intentionally not acted on.

  • Inference labeling tightened → reduces confidence inflation in ambiguous outputs
  • Stop rule clarified → prevents “helpful guessing” under uncertainty
  • Scope tags normalized → reduces misuse (decision-grade vs creative-grade)
  • Example of selective adoption: A suggestion to relax refusal constraints was reviewed and rejected to preserve decision-grade safety

Edit policy, supersession, and citation

This is the operating rule that keeps the index credible over time.

These reviews are not endorsements.
They are independent system evaluations.
Agreement is not guaranteed — and not required.
Conclusions are preserved without retroactive edits.

Superseded rule: If a reviewed artifact materially changes, prior reviews may be marked superseded. Superseded reviews remain visible for historical accuracy.

How to cite:
iWasGonna™ Independent System Review, ISR-2026-02 (Grok), Artifact: AI Blueprint v11.x, Feb 2026.

Plastering rule: Link the index site-wide. Keep long quotes in the unedited archive. Full AI Reviews (Unedited) →

Scroll to Top