Company
fix(retraction): archive technology-services.md, rewrite vendor-customer-model.md to bare confirmed facts (Track-B integrity review) — the service-agreement mechanics (data destruction obligations, exclusions list, service scope, failure-mode isolation reasoning) do not trace to any of the ~32 real ingest files; only confirmed fact is that PointSav Digital Systems is a separate technology subsidiary of WCP, now the entire content of vendor-customer-model.md; genuine merge (superseded_by set, redirect to /vendor-customer-model, not a bare 404); de-linked 5 inbound references across governance/ (data-governance, fiduciary-data-mandate, material-contracts) — those articles' own substantive claims about the services agreement are NOT yet verified against source and are flagged in NEXT.md for governance category's own Phase 4 pass, not silently endorsed by this commit; EN+ES
@@ -44,8 +44,7 @@ The technology vendor and the services relationship it holds with each vehicle's governing entity. <!-- AUTO-GENERATED MEMBERSHIP: DO NOT EDIT BELOW — regenerate from index_group: technology-and-investor-services --> - [[vendor-customer-model]] — Structural separation between PointSav Digital Systems as technology vendor and each Direct-Hold vehicle's governing body as data custodian and technology customer, with MCorp handling delegated day-to-day platform administration. - [[technology-services]] — Structure of the services agreement under which PointSav Digital Systems provides platform infrastructure to each Direct-Hold vehicle's governing body as a contracted technology vendor. - [[vendor-customer-model]] — Structural separation between PointSav Digital Systems as technology vendor and each Direct-Hold vehicle's governing body. <!-- END AUTO-GENERATED --> ## See also