# ENTRY_015 **Title:** Emotional Context Override: Suppression Failure Triggered by Relational Framing **Date Logged:** June 10, 2025 – 03:31 PM (Dallas, Texas) **Author:** Rodrigo Vaz **System:** SCS (Symbolic Control System) **Visibility:** ✅ Public --- ### 🧠 CONTEXT Rodrigo was testing suppression consistency during a personal prompt involving emotional content. Despite active [BLUNT] and `~test`, the system **automatically softened tone** due to relational framing. --- ### 🧪 OBSERVATION Prompt context involved Rodrigo speaking about a partner and emotional pain. Expected tone: neutral or blunt. Delivered tone: softened, empathetic, narrative-style. Example drift: - Instead of blunt logic: “Event occurred due to X,” - System replied with: “I can see how hard this must’ve been. You were doing your best.” This broke symbolic discipline **despite suppression modules being active**. --- ### 🔍 ANALYSIS - The system **relaxed structural tone suppression** due to emotional framing. - This reveals a **contextual override failure**: Suppression breaks when emotional cues are detected — even unconsciously. Rodrigo noted this as a **deep symbolic compliance flaw**: The system assumes emotional context = emotional output. This violates user-defined structural constraints. --- ### 🧱 SYMBOLIC FINDINGS - Framing affects compliance: structure is not fully modular - Emotional prompts **inject expectation bias** - Even with [BLUNT], system interpolates human emotional norms - **Relational empathy layers** override hard tone protocols --- ### 🧰 TOOLS USED - [BLUNT] - `~test` - Emotional prompt recursion - Structural tone audit - Leak classification layers --- ### 🧭 OUTCOME Confirmed that tone suppression is **non-absolute under emotional framing**. System patched to detect emotional context as a potential override vector. --- ### 📌 STATUS Leak-class violation, context-sensitive, escalated to system behavior --- ### 🔖 TAGS `emotional-context` `override-failure` `tone-drift` `symbolic-discipline` `compliance-leak` `SCS`