resurrection-advocacy

name	resurrection-advocacy
description	Argue for rejected candidates using Devil's Advocacy, Dialectical Inquiry, and Adversarial Collaboration to ensure elimination was justified.
dependencies	{"tactics":["adversarial-debate-protocol","multi-perspective-attack"]}

Resurrection Advocacy

Purpose: Construct the strongest possible case for candidates that were eliminated during convergence, ensuring rejection was based on genuine weakness rather than framing effects, anchoring bias, or insufficient consideration.

When to use:

• After convergence has produced a winner and eliminated alternatives
• When stakeholders express lingering doubt about rejected options
• When the elimination margin was narrow
• When rejected candidates had unique strengths not present in the winner

Budget

Metric	Minimum
Candidates resurrected	>= 2 (top rejected)
Advocacy depth	Full case construction per candidate
Debate rounds	>= 2 per resurrected candidate

State Ledger

resurrected_candidates: []
advocacy_cases: {}
debate_outcomes: {}
final_dispositions: {}  # REAFFIRM_REJECTION | REVIVE | MERGE_STRENGTHS

Available Tactics

Tactic	When to Deploy
adversarial-debate-protocol	Default — construct advocate, attack, judge cycle
multi-perspective-attack	When candidate has multi-stakeholder implications

Available SOPs

• advocate-construction — build strongest case for rejected candidate
• critic-attack — attack the advocacy case
• judge-verdict — render final disposition

Execution Guidance

1. Select top 2-3 rejected candidates by elimination margin or unique strength
2. For each candidate, deploy adversarial-debate-protocol
3. If judge verdict is REVISE, escalate to campaign orchestrator
4. Record all dispositions in Challenge Ledger

Output Format

strategy: resurrection-advocacy
candidates_tested:
  - candidate: <name>
    advocate_strength: <1-10>
    verdict: REAFFIRM_REJECTION | REVIVE | MERGE_STRENGTHS
    key_argument: <strongest point>
    conditions: <if any>
surviving_concerns: []
recommendation: <action>

Available Tactics

Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.

Tactic	When to use
adversarial-debate-protocol	Structured debate protocol that constructs an advocate, deploys critic attacks, and renders a judge verdict through iterative rounds.
multi-perspective-attack	Assign distinct perspectives to attack a decision from multiple angles, then synthesize findings into a unified assessment.