feat: expand seed library from 6 to 100 protocols

Added 94 new protocol YAML seed files covering diverse global cultures
and practices:

Indigenous & traditional: Maori powhiri, Aboriginal yarning, Somali xeer,
Moroccan jmaa, Tswana kgotla, Zulu imbizo, Peruvian ronda campesina,
Ohlone land-back, Inuit IQ consensus, Haudenosaunee condolence,
Navajo peacemaking, Ojibwe pipe ceremony, Polynesian talanoa,
Rwandan gacaca, West African palaver tree, Mexican tequio,
Javanese musyawarah-mufakat, Tibetan story council, Korean yangban,
Filipino utari, Ainu practices

Religious communities: Quaker meeting for business, clearness committee,
Amish shunning (Meidung), Mennonite discernment, Jewish hevruta,
Rastafari nyabinghi reasoning

Facilitation: World Cafe, Open Space, Future Search, Six Thinking Hats,
Dynamic Facilitation, Socratic Seminar, Delphi method, Copenhagen
Consensus, Lean Coffee, Hackathon sprint, Agile retrospective,
Stand-up meeting, Pair programming, Roadmap planning

Governance: Sociocratic consent selection, Dynamic self-governance,
Cooperative consensus, Hackerspace consensus, Mastodon governance,
Climate assemblies (x2), Basque asamblearismo

Conflict & repair: Restorative conference, circle sentencing,
Nonviolent Communication (3 protocols), Active listening mirror,
Appreciative apology repair

Community & care: Community kitchen, Gratefulness circle, Passing circle,
Paired walking, Deep listening dyad, Mutual aid, Permaculture charrette

Education: Barefoot College night school, Socratic seminar

Everyday: Various greeting, transition, and gratitude protocols

All protocols credit original sources. Cultural context noted in
descriptions. All YAML files validated.

seeds/copenhagen-consensus.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+id: copenhagen-consensus
+title: Copenhagen Consensus Expert Prioritisation
+description: >-
+  A method where a panel of economists prioritises global challenges by
+  cost-benefit analysis, used by the Copenhagen Consensus Center founded
+  by Bjorn Lomborg. Combines expert panels with economic evaluation to
+  direct attention to the most effective interventions.
+source: Copenhagen Consensus Center
+source_url: https://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/
+tags: [prioritisation, experts, cost-benefit, global, policy]
+forked_from: null
+image: null
+steps:
+  - headline: Commission challenge papers
+    description: >-
+      For each challenge, an expert is commissioned to write a paper
+      assessing interventions and their cost-benefit ratios, with
+      transparent methodology.
+  - headline: Expert panel deliberates
+    description: >-
+      A panel of distinguished economists reads the papers, questions the
+      authors, and deliberates on the relative value of interventions
+      across challenges.
+  - headline: Rank by return
+    description: >-
+      The panel ranks interventions by their benefit-cost ratio, producing
+      a list that directs attention and resources to the highest-return
+      options.
+  - headline: Publish with dissent
+    description: >-
+      The rankings are published with the panel's reasoning and any
+      dissenting notes, so the basis is transparent and open to challenge.
+  - headline: Invite response
+    description: >-
+      The wider community of experts and the public are invited to respond,
+      with the possibility of revisiting rankings in light of new
+      evidence.
+outcome: >-
+  A transparent prioritisation of interventions, based on cost-benefit
+  analysis and expert deliberation, published with reasoning for
+  scrutiny.
+practice: >-
+  The cost-benefit frame has limits — it can miss values not easily
+  monetised. Use it as one input, not as the answer. Transparency of
+  method is what makes it challengeable.