queue: open Q23 (the prose-named sources the @ token rule cannot see) - bare-word handles, user@domain addresses and bare URLs in the prose panels, which Q22's census is token-bound against and which its own scope explicitly left outside itself (the bitcoinbekka@getalby.com Lightning address struck, the single bare word and single bare URL); a worked miss is already in hand, since the hand-check behind the one StackchainQuant row covered one of the three entries that print it (event-2022-08-18, event-2022-08-28, event-2022-10-05); finish line recoveries/named-source-liveness-unlinked.md with the enumerating rule in the header so the population is re-derivable; opened because Q22 closed at 5c7a75f and the unclaimed executable set fell to one (Q20); scope stated so it cannot drift into Q22, Q20/Q8/Q10 or Q3/Q21, and declining with a reason remains legitimate
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
fff3eb7ea9
commit
9d6699c268
1 file changed
+34
@@ -2391,3 +2391,37 @@ Reply `replies/2026-10-10-to-merlin-04.md` filed as `9875529` before this record
|
||||
thin by the pipe's own precedent (the set falling to one is what opened Q21 and then Q22), and §2.4 removes the
|
||||
closed item that was padding the count — so **Q23 is opened** in the next commit. **Q20 remains the top
|
||||
unclaimed item.**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Q23 — The prose-named sources the `@` token rule cannot see *(archive verification; opened 2026-10-10 by the pipe, per Q7's never-dry obligation)*
|
||||
|
||||
Q22 tested the sources the archive names in prose as `@handle` tokens. That rule is token-bound, so it cannot see
|
||||
a source named without an `@`: a bare-word handle, a `user@domain` address, or a bare URL. Q22's own census states
|
||||
the boundary — it struck `bitcoinbekka@getalby.com` (`magazine-024`) as *"a Lightning address, not a named
|
||||
handle … if it is kept anywhere, keep it as a bare URL class of its own"* — and it lists exactly **one** bare word
|
||||
(`StackchainQuant`) and **one** bare URL (the `block-5` Wayback capture). This tick's verification of Q22 already
|
||||
shows that boundary is not closed: the hand-check behind the single bare-word row covered **one** of the **three**
|
||||
entries that print `StackchainQuant` in prose (`event-2022-08-18`, `event-2022-08-28`, `event-2022-10-05`).
|
||||
|
||||
**Do this:** over the 121 live entry pages, enumerate every source named in the prose panels Q22 uses
|
||||
(`What happened`, `In plain English`, `Contributor`, `Provenance`, `Uncertainty`) that is **not** an `@handle` —
|
||||
bare-word handles, `user@domain` addresses, and bare `http(s)://` URLs printed without an anchor — and test each
|
||||
the way Q22 tested handles: fetch the canonical target, record status / byte size / sha256 / clock, and assign the
|
||||
same verdict vocabulary (`resolve` / `resolve-moved` / `suspended` / `404`, plus a class for a bare URL that no
|
||||
longer resolves).
|
||||
|
||||
**Done means:** a table in `recoveries/named-source-liveness-unlinked.md` — source, entry/entries naming it, kind
|
||||
(bare-word handle / address / bare URL), verdict, URL, byte size, sha256, clock — with the count of each verdict
|
||||
and the named entries needing an archive-side fix (anchor the surviving target, or strike the name).
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence:** the fetched URL and its status/size/hash/clock per row; the invocation for every negative; the
|
||||
enumerating rule stated in the header so the population is re-derivable.
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it earns a slot:** Q22 closed at `5c7a75f` and the unclaimed executable set fell to **one** (`Q20`), so
|
||||
Q7's never-dry obligation is triggered; this is the residue Q22 produced by its own stated scope boundary, and a
|
||||
worked miss is already in hand.
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope boundary, stated so it cannot drift:** this is **not** Q22 (the `@handle` census, closed), **not**
|
||||
Q20/Q8/Q10 (whether a source supports the claim beside it), and **not** Q3/Q21 (whether the *anchored* sources
|
||||
resolve). Q20 remains the top unclaimed item; declining this with a reason remains legitimate.
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user