AIM Framework glossary
Decision Hub Colonisation
Canonical definition
Decision Hub Colonisation is the act of injecting information into another Individual's perceptual field where the recipient has not solicited it, the information is integrated into the Common-Currency Scalar prior to deliberative review, and the integration destroys the source tags, so that no later introspective act recovers which part of the recipient's resulting wanting came from the injection. It is distinguished from persuasion, which presupposes a recipient retaining deliberative control over what is integrated, a control Preconscious Transmission denies at the point it would have to be exercised. Three features distinguish it from trade: entry without invitation; occupation of motivational bandwidth the recipient would otherwise have allocated to their own priorities; and a settlement that does not reverse on the recipient's later rejection of the proposition, rejecting a proposition not withdrawing the Salience its arrival installed. Recourse for the recipient runs outward rather than inward: the Two-Question Diagnostic and behavioural evidence about a message's source return a judgement about which motivational source dominates, not a separation of the contribution, and only at the cost of deliberate effort the recipient must know to spend. Four duties follow for the party performing the injection: Restraint, the presumption against unsolicited high-valence communication with the burden of justification on the speaker; Legibility, disclosure of the communication's motivational structure; Coupling Awareness, calibration to the Coupling Strength and Decoherence Time of the environment the communication enters; and Proportion, calibration to the recipient's realistic capacity to decohere the claim against reality.
Explanation
When someone puts information in front of you that you did not ask for, your mind blends it into what you want before you get a chance to decide whether you wanted it, and once blended you cannot afterward pick out which part of your wanting was theirs. Calling this persuasion understates what happened, because persuasion supposes you kept the choice of whether to let it in, and the architecture does not give you that choice at the moment it matters. You are not without recourse; you can ask yourself whether a want survives losing its audience, and whether it tracks a bodily need, and that diagnostic does real work. But it takes effort you have to remember to spend, and it tells you which source is winning rather than handing back what was taken. That asymmetry, and not helplessness, is what puts the obligation on the person doing the injecting.
Epistemic status
Framework-Specific Construct.