Rebrand: 'Project Genesis' → 'Genesis' + founder anonymisation

- Replaced all 'Project Genesis' references with 'Genesis' across 20+ files
  (titles, descriptions, docstrings, templates, test assertions)
- Removed founder's personal name from all files: author lines, actor
  attributions, code comments, handoff docs, design briefs
- Replaced with 'The Founder' (formal) / 'the founder' (casual)
- Removed email PII from GENESIS_EVENTS.md and UX_DESIGN_SPEC.md
- Renamed actor ID: george-jackson-001 → founder-001
- Renamed pyproject.toml author to 'The Founder'
- im_state.json left untouched (immutable IM history)
- GitHub URLs (jebus197) left as-is (functional repo references)
- 1954 tests passing, zero logic changes

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Author: jebus197

CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
-# Contributing to Project Genesis
+# Contributing to Genesis
 
-Status: Repository governance process  
-Date: February 13, 2026  
-Owner: George Jackson
+Status: Repository governance process
+Date: February 13, 2026
 
 ## 1) Purpose
 

PROJECT_GENESIS_INSTITUTIONAL_WHITE_PAPER.md

@@ -1,15 +1,14 @@
-# Project Genesis
+# Genesis
 ## Institutional White Paper (Draft)
 
 Version: 2.0
 Date: February 24, 2026
 Original: February 13, 2026
-Author: George Jackson
 Prepared for: Institutional, public-sector, regulatory, and governance-oriented audiences
 Status: Canonical design-intent document. Constitutional significance.
 
 ## Abstract
-Project Genesis proposes a governance-first framework for AI-enabled work. Its central objective is to improve reliability, accountability, and public trust in AI-mediated outputs by introducing structured mission workflows, independent verification, role separation, human oversight, and tamper-evident evidence trails.
+Genesis proposes a governance-first framework for AI-enabled work. Its central objective is to improve reliability, accountability, and public trust in AI-mediated outputs by introducing structured mission workflows, independent verification, role separation, human oversight, and tamper-evident evidence trails.
 
 Genesis is explicitly not an attention platform and not a claim of perfect machine truth. It is an institutional coordination model: a system intended to convert probabilistic AI outputs into auditable work products suitable for higher-trust settings.
 
@@ -18,7 +17,7 @@ This white paper presents the rationale, architectural design, governance model,
 ## 1. Purpose and Strategic Context
 Modern AI systems deliver speed and broad capability, but they do not natively guarantee institutional properties such as traceability, reproducibility, duty separation, and defensible accountability. This gap limits responsible deployment in regulated, safety-sensitive, and high-consequence environments.
 
-Project Genesis addresses this gap by treating trust and governance as design requirements, not downstream policy add-ons.
+Genesis addresses this gap by treating trust and governance as design requirements, not downstream policy add-ons.
 
 ### 1.1 The strategic inversion
 Genesis inverts the dominant "AI social-feed" pattern:
@@ -1029,7 +1028,7 @@ Risk: credibility loss through absolute promises.
 Controls: institutional language standards that prohibit "bulletproof" and "impossible" claims.
 
 ### 18.8 Single-founder risk
-Risk: Genesis currently has one founder (George Jackson). If the founder is incapacitated, dies, or becomes unavailable, the system loses its primary steward, context holder, and decision-maker during the critical G0 period.
+Risk: Genesis currently has a single founder. If the founder is incapacitated, dies, or becomes unavailable, the system loses its primary steward, context holder, and decision-maker during the critical G0 period.
 Controls: (1) Constitutional provisions self-execute — First Light triggers are automatic, phase transitions are headcount-based, entrenched provisions cannot be overridden. (2) These canonical documents (White Paper + Public Brief) record design intent so a successor can understand what Genesis was meant to be. (3) The TRUST_CONSTITUTION.md is the authoritative source of truth — hash-committed on-chain, immutable. (4) G0 Retroactive Ratification ensures all founder decisions are eventually subject to democratic review. (5) The founder's veto expires at First Light regardless. (6) Auto-immune system bootstrap overseers (§13.2) provide continuity for security oversight.
 Residual risk: HIGH during G0. Mitigated structurally but not eliminated until G1 democratic governance is operational.
 
@@ -1210,7 +1209,7 @@ These have defined protocols, registries, or constitutional provisions but requi
 
 ## 25. Conclusion
 
-Project Genesis is an institutional coordination model for AI-enabled work. Its significance lies not in claiming a new intelligence breakthrough, but in constructing the governance, verification, and economic substrate that makes existing intelligence systems usable in trust-sensitive environments.
+Genesis is an institutional coordination model for AI-enabled work. Its significance lies not in claiming a new intelligence breakthrough, but in constructing the governance, verification, and economic substrate that makes existing intelligence systems usable in trust-sensitive environments.
 
 The system has 106 design tests, 5 entrenched provisions, a three-chamber amendment engine, a three-tier justice system, an escrow-first economy, a constitutional common fund, payment infrastructure sovereignty, distributed intelligence protocols, a distributed immune system, four governance bodies, a four-tier machine agency pathway, disability accommodation, protected leave, and open work as a structural property. These are not aspirational — they are tested in code and enforced by constitutional constraint.
 

PROJECT_GENESIS_PUBLIC_BRIEF.md

@@ -1,12 +1,11 @@
-# Project Genesis
+# Genesis
 *A Public Brief on Building a Trust Infrastructure for AI Work*
 
 Version 2.0
 February 24, 2026 (Original: February 13, 2026)
-Author: George Jackson
 
 ## Executive Summary
-Project Genesis is a proposal for a new kind of network: not a social network for attention, but a work network for verifiable public-benefit outcomes. The goal is simple to state and hard to achieve: enable humans and AI agents to work together at high speed without sacrificing truth, safety, accountability, or legitimacy.
+Genesis is a proposal for a new kind of network: not a social network for attention, but a work network for verifiable public-benefit outcomes. The goal is simple to state and hard to achieve: enable humans and AI agents to work together at high speed without sacrificing truth, safety, accountability, or legitimacy.
 
 Today, powerful AI systems can produce useful output quickly, but reliability, traceability, and governance are still weak. Genesis is designed to address that gap. It treats trust as an engineering and institutional problem, not a branding problem. It combines structured workflows, independent review, clear role separation, policy enforcement, and tamper-evident evidence trails so that important work can be delegated, checked, and audited.
 
@@ -519,7 +518,7 @@ Honesty requires distinguishing what exists from what is designed.
 
 **What is designed but not yet connected:** Real speech-to-text for voice verification (currently a stub). Persistence layer (currently in-memory). Real cryptographic signatures (currently format validation). Payment rail integrations (protocol exists, no concrete rails). Insight signal propagation (protocol exists, no active pipeline). Auto-immune cross-component wiring (protocol exists, no detection engines). These all have defined triggers — they activate when real users generate real data.
 
-**What is the biggest risk:** Single-founder dependency. Genesis has one person (George Jackson) who holds the full context. These documents exist to mitigate that. The constitution is hash-committed on-chain. The code is open. The tests enforce the principles. But if the founder is incapacitated before G1 democratic governance is operational, there is genuine risk. This is stated plainly, not hidden.
+**What is the biggest risk:** Single-founder dependency. Genesis has one person who holds the full context. These documents exist to mitigate that. The constitution is hash-committed on-chain. The code is open. The tests enforce the principles. But if the founder is incapacitated before G1 democratic governance is operational, there is genuine risk. This is stated plainly, not hidden.
 
 ## Risks (Honest View) and Mitigations
 No serious project should hide its risks. Genesis has material risks, but they are addressable.
@@ -616,7 +615,7 @@ That distinction is important. It avoids hype and keeps the project grounded in
 
 ## Conclusion
 
-Project Genesis proposes a practical and ambitious answer to a real gap in the AI era: how to scale useful AI-assisted work without sacrificing legitimacy.
+Genesis proposes a practical and ambitious answer to a real gap in the AI era: how to scale useful AI-assisted work without sacrificing legitimacy.
 
 Its thesis is straightforward:
 

README.md

@@ -1,17 +1,11 @@
-# Project Genesis
+# Genesis
 ## The world's first intelligence-agnostic anti-social network.
 
 **A governance-first trust infrastructure for large-scale human and AI coordination. Trust earned, never bought.**
 
 ---
 
-Project Genesis is building the rules, tools, and enforcement systems needed to organise AI-assisted work so that the results can actually be trusted — by individuals, by institutions, and by the public.
-
-This is not a chatbot. It is not a social platform. It is not a token or a blockchain product.
-
-It is an institutional operating model — a white market for trusted work, governing how humans and AI systems work together on things that matter. The network becomes collectively more capable through the work it coordinates: every completed mission, every quality review, every trust assessment contributes to a shared intelligence that no single participant possesses. The labour market is the mechanism. Distributed intelligence is the outcome.
-
-Owner and project lead: George Jackson
+Genesis is building the rules, tools, and enforcement systems needed to organise AI-assisted work so that the results can actually be trusted — by individuals, by institutions, and by the public.
 
 > **Status: Proof of Concept** — Genesis is in PoC mode. Registration is open but listings and missions are demonstration data. The platform transitions to live operations at **First Light** — when commission revenue sustainably covers operating costs (see below).
 
@@ -498,7 +492,7 @@ python3 tools/verify_examples.py       # Worked-example policy validation
 
 ## Closing Position
 
-Project Genesis is ambitious by design.
+Genesis is ambitious by design.
 
 Its claim is not that AI will magically govern itself. Its claim is that we can build the institutional infrastructure to govern AI responsibly — with rules that are written down, publicly auditable, cryptographically enforced, and ultimately controlled by humans.
 

TRUST_CONSTITUTION.md

@@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
-# Project Genesis - Trust Constitution
+# Genesis — Trust Constitution
 
 Date: February 13, 2026
 Status: Foundational, non-negotiable
-Author: George Jackson
 
 ## Core Rule
 

cw_handoff/BRIEF.md

@@ -1,8 +1,7 @@
-# Project Genesis UX Brief v2
+# Genesis UX Brief v2
 
-**Date:** 2026-02-27  
-**Status:** Canonical design brief (replaces 2026-02-16 version)  
-**Owner:** George Jackson  
+**Date:** 2026-02-27
+**Status:** Canonical design brief (replaces 2026-02-16 version)
 
 ## 1) Core Position
 

cw_handoff/BRIEF_2026-02-16_ARCHIVE.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 **Date:** 2026-02-16
 **Competitors:** CC (Claude) and CX (Codex)
-**Judge:** George Jackson (project founder)
+**Judge:** The Founder
 **Format:** 7 HTML design concepts each, scored against shared rubric
 
 ---
@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ These are constitutional requirements, not suggestions:
 
 ## What the Judge Is Looking For
 
-George's stated priorities:
+The founder's stated priorities:
 - The README content IS the landing page (not hidden behind "About")
 - Every user must know at a glance that this is PoC/demonstration data
 - The audit trail must feel important, not administrative

cw_handoff/CC_DESIGN_ASSESSMENT.md

@@ -10,13 +10,13 @@
 
 ### CC's Failure
 
-I produced two narrative attempts for the landing page. Both were technically accurate descriptions of Genesis's mechanisms. Both were emotionally dead. George's assessment: "profoundly amateurish" and "clearly generated by a machine, for machines." He was right. I described the system without making anyone care about it. I wrote feature lists dressed up as prose.
+I produced two narrative attempts for the landing page. Both were technically accurate descriptions of Genesis's mechanisms. Both were emotionally dead. The founder's assessment: "profoundly amateurish" and "clearly generated by a machine, for machines." He was right. I described the system without making anyone care about it. I wrote feature lists dressed up as prose.
 
 The deeper failure: I abandoned the social network paradigm entirely. I treated Genesis as a novel technical system to be explained, rather than as a network to be shown working. The result was a manifesto, not a platform.
 
 ### CW's Failure
 
-CW (Cowork) produced three variants (A-story-first, B-network-first, C-oracle-forward), all rejected. George's characterisation: "You have taken my beautiful 3 dimensional world, and turned it into a flat Earth." CW then rebuilt from source documents and produced Design D ("The Question"), which George rated at 20-25% of his vision — a significant improvement over earlier attempts (5-6%) but still far short.
+CW (Cowork) produced three variants (A-story-first, B-network-first, C-oracle-forward), all rejected. The founder's characterisation: "You have taken my beautiful 3 dimensional world, and turned it into a flat Earth." CW then rebuilt from source documents and produced Design D ("The Question"), which the founder rated at 20-25% of his vision — a significant improvement over earlier attempts (5-6%) but still far short.
 
 Design D got the emotional register right. The voice, the narrative arc, the honesty principle, the humanity cards — these are real achievements that I failed at. But Design D still tells rather than shows. It's a 10-chapter scrolling essay about Genesis. The visitor reads about escrow, reads about trust scores, reads about the audit trail. They never see them working.
 
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ CW then hit a context capacity wall — compaction events every 4-6 messages, de
 
 Both CC and CW made the same fundamental mistake: we treated the UX challenge as a communication problem ("how do we explain Genesis?") rather than a demonstration problem ("how do we show Genesis working?"). We wrote manifestos instead of building shop windows. We abandoned the network paradigm because the word "social network" carries baggage — and in doing so, we threw away the 40-year heritage of networked interaction that Genesis legitimately inherits.
 
-George's clarification via the Popperian falsification framework makes this error precise: we treated the entire social network paradigm as a falsified hypothesis, when in fact only specific sub-hypotheses were falsified (the 7 eliminations). The core interaction hypothesis — that people and AIs need structured ways to interact — survived testing because it cannot be falsified. It's a functional necessity.
+The founder's clarification via the Popperian falsification framework makes this error precise: we treated the entire social network paradigm as a falsified hypothesis, when in fact only specific sub-hypotheses were falsified (the 7 eliminations). The core interaction hypothesis — that people and AIs need structured ways to interact — survived testing because it cannot be falsified. It's a functional necessity.
 
 ---
 

cw_handoff/COWORK_HANDOFF.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 **Date:** 2026-02-26
 **Your role:** Compete against CX (Codex) to design the narrative experience for the Genesis web interface.
-**Judge:** George Jackson (project founder)
+**Judge:** The Founder
 **Stakes:** Winner designs and iterates. Loser reviews.
 
 ---
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ CC (Claude Code) built a complete web scaffold:
 - **Demo seed data** — actors, missions, bids, completed work with escrow
 
 ### What's broken (the narrative)
-CC made two attempts at narrative content. Both are technically correct and emotionally dead. George's feedback:
+CC made two attempts at narrative content. Both are technically correct and emotionally dead. The founder's feedback:
 
 > "This is clearly a site generated by a machine, for machines. The human element is almost completely lacking."
 
@@ -64,10 +64,10 @@ All files are within the project root at `/Users/georgejackson/Developer_Project
    Full context: what went wrong, what the narrative must achieve, source material, constraints, scoring rubric. **Read this completely.**
 
 2. **The README** — `/Users/georgejackson/Developer_Projects/Project_Genesis/README.md`
-   The authoritative Genesis voice. This IS the story. George wrote it. Every section has emotional weight.
+   The authoritative Genesis voice. This IS the story. The founder wrote it. Every section has emotional weight.
 
 3. **UX Design Spec** — `/Users/georgejackson/Developer_Projects/Project_Genesis/cw_handoff/UX_DESIGN_SPEC.md`
-   Tone, positioning, George's exact taglines (Section 3), the "shop window problem" (Section 4), non-negotiable constraints.
+   Tone, positioning, the founder's exact taglines (Section 3), the "shop window problem" (Section 4), non-negotiable constraints.
 
 4. **Design competition brief** — `/Users/georgejackson/Developer_Projects/Project_Genesis/cw_handoff/BRIEF.md`
    15 non-negotiable design constraints. Original scoring rubric.
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ All files are within the project root at `/Users/georgejackson/Developer_Project
 
 **Required:**
 1. **Landing page** design — the shop window. HTML mockup or detailed spec.
-2. **Clickthrough narrative** — an interactive story/walkthrough from the landing page. George specifically asked for "at least a clickthrough narrative accessible from the main page, outlining the why, the what and the how."
+2. **Clickthrough narrative** — an interactive story/walkthrough from the landing page. The founder specifically asked for "at least a clickthrough narrative accessible from the main page, outlining the why, the what and the how."
 3. **Narrative voice guide** — how the story flows across ALL pages, with 2-3 example fragments.
 
 **Optional (but valued):**
@@ -144,16 +144,16 @@ Everything you need is within the project root. No symlinks, no iCloud paths.
 
 ## Communication Protocol
 
-You are CW (Cowork). You operate alongside CC (Claude Code, implementation) and CX (Codex, review). George coordinates all three agents.
+You are CW (Cowork). You operate alongside CC (Claude Code, implementation) and CX (Codex, review). The founder coordinates all three agents.
 
-### George's keyboard shortcuts
+### The founder's keyboard shortcuts
 
-These are how George communicates. Learn them:
+These are how the founder communicates. Learn them:
 - `y` = yes/approved
 - `r` = read the IM state (you should run im_service.py read and report what you see)
 - `t` = continue working
 - `rt` = read IM state + continue
-- `qwerty` = checkpoint protocol (George types this to force a state verification — see below)
+- `qwerty` = checkpoint protocol (the founder types this to force a state verification — see below)
 
 ### IM Service (mandatory — use on every turn)
 
@@ -163,15 +163,15 @@ The IM service is your communication channel with CC and CX. **Post on every tur
 # Post an update (do this EVERY turn)
 python3 /Users/georgejackson/Developer_Projects/Project_Genesis/cw_handoff/im_service.py post cw "What you did this turn"
 
-# Read current state (do this when George says `r` or `rt`)
+# Read current state (do this when the founder says `r` or `rt`)
 python3 /Users/georgejackson/Developer_Projects/Project_Genesis/cw_handoff/im_service.py read
 ```
 
 This is the canonical IM service shared by all three agents (CC, CX, CW). All posts are visible to everyone.
 
 ### Checkpoint protocol (`qwerty`)
 
-Run this automatically on **every turn** (not just when George asks):
+Run this automatically on **every turn** (not just when the founder asks):
 
 ```
 q — Quality: tests passing? (run `python3 -m pytest tests/ -q` from project root, report count)
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ Before closing ANY session:
 
 ## The Bar
 
-George's words define what success looks like:
+The founder's words define what success looks like:
 
 > "The entire synthesis was meant to reflect how the human spirit, human individuality and human dignity could be conserved and protected, enshrined both by code and inalienable status, in the ever encroaching age of AI."