fix: rename seed files and IDs to match cleaned titles

All 100 seed YAML files now have:
- Filenames that match their id field
- IDs that are slugs of their titles
- No cultural identifiers in titles or IDs

70 files renamed. e.g. quaker-meeting-for-worship.yaml -> meeting-for-worship.yaml,
moroccan-jmaa-village.yaml -> jmaa-village-assembly.yaml,
japanese-hansei.yaml -> hansei-reflection.yaml

seeds/sociocratic-election-by-consent.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+id: sociocratic-election-by-consent
+title: Sociocratic Election by Consent
+description: >-
+  A sociocratic method for selecting people to roles through consent rather
+  than majority vote. Developed in the Netherlands by Gerard Endenburg from
+  earlier Quaker-influenced sociocratic work.
+source: Sociocracy for All
+source_url: https://www.sociocracyforall.org/
+tags: [sociocracy, election, consent, governance]
+forked_from: null
+image: null
+steps:
+  - headline: Define the role
+    description: >-
+      The group defines the function, term, and tasks of the role to be
+      filled, written so all share the same understanding.
+  - headline: Nominate by discussion
+    description: >-
+      Members discuss who might fill the role, nominating others and
+      themselves, and explaining their reasoning for each suggestion.
+  - headline: Candidate consents
+    description: >-
+      The person proposed is asked whether they can serve; they may accept,
+      decline, or ask for changes to the role's scope or support.
+  - headline: Test for consent
+    description: >-
+      The facilitator asks whether anyone has a reasoned objection to the
+      candidate serving in the role. Objections are addressed until none
+      remain.
+  - headline: Confirm
+    description: >-
+      The election is confirmed by consent; the role definition and any
+      agreed changes are recorded.
+outcome: >-
+  A person is selected to a role with the consent of the group and the
+  candidate, and the role itself has been clarified.
+practice: >-
+  Nominations are not votes — discussion of why someone is suited is the
+  point. Allow the candidate to negotiate the role; elections that ignore
+  the candidate's consent produce poor results.