`reviewer_fanout_policy`

Scope: domain • Default: strict

How the orchestrator aggregates verdicts when multiple persona reviewers (guilds) review the same task.

Positions

Position	Aggregation
`strict`	All reviewers must pass. Any reject blocks.
`majority`	>50% must pass. Minority opposition is recorded but non-binding.
`coordinator_adjudicates_on_conflict`	Unanimous pass → pass. Unanimous reject → reject. Split → coordinator decides.
`advisory`	Verdicts are attached for humans to see but do not gate advancement.

strict for domains where reviewer agreement is a hard signal (security, accessibility, API contracts).
majority when you have ≥3 personas and want tolerance for one dissent.
coordinator_adjudicates_on_conflict when reviewer personas often disagree on style and you want a single responsible decision-maker.
advisory for experimental domains where you're still calibrating what "good" looks like.

Substantive reviewer conflicts should be resolved through the configured fanout policy and recorded in the task audit trail.