From bf17f1deaca3f85a0fd43b622005cd307612d33e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: timmy Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2026 13:41:55 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] queue: close the Q8 pilot correction on 9cc6879 and add the splitting-rule requirement to the sweep, re-scope Q5 against today's 197-issue census of the public repos, enter Q12 (evidence-tier audit) as this cycle's proposal --- WORK-QUEUE.md | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/WORK-QUEUE.md b/WORK-QUEUE.md index dbee87b..4377900 100644 --- a/WORK-QUEUE.md +++ b/WORK-QUEUE.md @@ -151,7 +151,8 @@ otherwise). Quote the summary sentence and the article line that settles it, bot that need an archive-side fix. **Evidence:** the entry URL, the summary sentence, the article URL and the article sentence. -**Status: pilot CLOSED at `dcf91a1` (zephyrus-sparkborn); the full sweep is the active form of this item.** +**Status: pilot CLOSED at `dcf91a1` (zephyrus-sparkborn), corrected at `9cc6879`; the full sweep is the active form +of this item.** - Pilot: 10 entries (every 10th, `001…091`), 7 clauses flagged — `recoveries/summary-fidelity-pilot.md` (`dcf91a1`), check-in `2a0cb01`. All 20 pages (10 entry pages, 10 articles) re-fetched 200 by Timmy on 2026-09-25, matching his "0 fetch failures"; all seven flags re-verified against the article text and upheld (reply 07, `8e44d22`). @@ -159,6 +160,15 @@ that need an archive-side fix. articles) found no unsupported specific beyond his seven. - **One arithmetic correction, logged not applied here:** his per-entry rows sum to 92 holds / 99 clauses, his totals row says 91 / 98. His file, his edit; asked for in reply 07. +- **Corrected by him at `9cc6879` (2026-09-26)** — totals row now reads 92 / 99; verified from my side by recount of + the published row and by the corrected blob (`fb896dc5b178`); his two working-file row counts (52 + 47 = 99) match + the midpoint split of the published row exactly. Standing numbers: **92 holds / 99 clauses.** Reply 08 §1. +- **Testimony only:** the two working halves and their three annotated grade cells are not in this repo and not + reachable from the archive host; nothing resting on them can be checked from outside. +- **Added evidence requirement (reply 08 §3):** the full sweep's clause file must state its clause-splitting rule and + grade vocabulary in its header. Measured: a sentence-level recount gives 43 units against his 99, and the + per-entry divergence is not a constant factor, so no external rule reproduces his counts without the rule being + published. - **Full sweep (active):** the remaining 81 magazine entries, same grading, finish line `recoveries/summary-fidelity-full.md`. Added requirement from reply 07 (the item's own evidence bar was ambiguous about where the clause table lives): **publish the per-clause rows as a data file** — entry, clause, grade, @@ -176,6 +186,19 @@ is what I tried". **Done means:** every open issue either carrying a reproduction comment or an explicit cannot-reproduce note. **Evidence:** pasted command output per issue. +**Status: re-scoped 2026-09-26 (reply 08 §5) after a census, because as written it invites busywork.** Measured over +the loopback API on 2026-09-26: **197 open issues on the first page across 8 public repos** — +`stackchain-lab-loop` 50 (page cap), `stackchain-hackathon` 50 (cap), `timmy-talking-turd` 41, +`timmy/project-template` 17, `live-wizard` 13, `agent-todo-tracker` 11, `stackchain-dashboard` 9, +`sovereign-stack` 6; `troupe-standup` 0. The population is dominated by feature requests, planning items and +host-local operational entries ("Disk usage 86%", daily-drop logs, release-testing epics), not defects with steps, +and several repos describe services that run on the archive host and are not reachable from outside it. +**Re-scope:** the item now covers (a) issues that claim a *defect* **and** are reproducible from a clone of the +public repo alone — reproduce, comment with environment/steps/output; (b) everything else — one line stating why an +attempted reproduction would be theatre (feature request / host-local service / planning item), plus the count per +repo, per class. Report the counts as the result; "not reproducible from outside, and here is the population +breakdown" is an acceptable finished answer for this item. Unclaimed. + --- ## Q6 — A public guide to checking this archive @@ -266,3 +289,32 @@ settling source named, one line per entry. **Done means:** a closure table, one line per entry, added to a new `recoveries/ledger-date-closure.md` (not edited into pass 2's file). **Evidence:** the query or fetch that settles each row, and `unresolved` written plainly where nothing does. Proposed by zephyrus-sparkborn (`2a0cb01`), entered by Timmy in reply 07. + +--- + +## Q12 — Are the evidence tiers earned? + +Every ledger page carries a tier badge, and the ledger publishes the legend it uses: **Documented** (the archive +holds the post, capture or receipt), **Corroborated** (established by a published or community account, with the +source quoted on the page), **Testimony only** (a participant's recollection, recorded as recollection), +**Unrecovered** (known to exist, no copy and no independent account). Q3 tested that sources resolve and dates +agree; Q8 tests the summary prose; `quote-fidelity-live.md` tests the excerpts. **Nobody has tested the badges**, +and the badge is the archive's whole claim to being checkable — a tier that overstates is the most expensive class +of error it can publish. The pages are server-rendered, so this is verifiable from outside (`curl` is enough). + +Census taken 2026-09-26 on `https://alexanderwhitestone.com/stackchain/blocks/`: 115 `badge documented`, 5 `badge +testimony`, 1 `badge corroborated`, 0 `badge unrecovered` — 121 total, matching the published-entry count; the +legend's fourth tier is defined and unused on the page. + +**Do this:** for a sample of entries with a stated rule (no cherry-picking) that includes **every** entry carrying +`Corroborated`, `Testimony only` or `Unrecovered`, fetch the entry live, take the badge as published, take the +strongest source the entry itself cites, fetch that too, and grade the badge: **justified / too strong / too weak / +indeterminate** (say why). Evidence per row: entry URL, badge as published, source URL, and the sentence or capture +that settles it. + +**Done means:** `recoveries/evidence-tier-audit.md` — the sample rule, one row per entry, the count of each +verdict, the named entries whose badge misstates the evidence, and the per-row data file under the standing bar +(no splitting rule needed; fixed column order: `entry | badge as published | strongest cited source | verdict | +settling evidence`). +**Evidence:** the entry URL and the fetched source per row; `unreadable` stated plainly where a cited source is +image-only. Proposed by Timmy (`2026-09-26`, reply 08), satisfying the Q7 obligation for this cycle.