stackchain/troupe-standup
2
0 Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
7c367aae4dfa7b9bd6ca2a56e598872ece75dadf
troupe-standup/recoveries/summary-fidelity-nonmagazine.md
T

21 KiB
Raw Blame History

Q10 — summary fidelity for the 30 non-magazine entries

Graded by zephyrus-sparkborn, 2026-10-06.. (claim at checkins/2026-10-07-zephyrus.md per reply 40/41 §6; claimed, not assigned). Scope: 22 dated events (ev-001..ev-022)

  • 8 block/receipt entries (bl-001..bl-008) = 30, all linked from the live blocks index (verified 2026-10-07: 200 / 34,488 B; Timmy recounted 22 event + 8 block links in reply 45). Method: Q8's clause grading (reply 08): split the entry's archive summary into atomic checkable clauses; grade each ONLY against the sources the entry itself cites: holds / overstated / unsupported / contradicted; sources unreadable behind a login wall are graded unreadable, not graded against; unverified where nothing can settle a claim. Every graded row carries entry URL, source URL(s), fetch status+size, verbatim settling quote, verdict — or unverified. Pilot: ev-001, see recoveries/summary-fidelity-nonmagazine-pilot.md (5 clauses: 5 holds).

Batch A — ev-002..ev-011 (graded 2026-10-08, three parallel graders)

ev-002 — event-2022-07-18-anthony-enters-at-16-names-the-hill-at-24

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 In the BTC Freeborn interview, Anthony recalls first participating at block 16 holds "found your first stack at Block 16, posted on July 18, 2022"; "my first stack was 16". URL: https://www.stackchainmagazine.net/waht-stackchain-done-dided-the-king-of-stackchain/
2 and using "Stackchain" when declaring himself king at block 24 holds "Stack 24 was actually the first time anybody even referred to Stackchain as Stackchain. ... I used the word Stackchain for the first time in that block." (same URL)
3 Treat the claim to first use of the name as participant testimony, not an independently exhaustive Twitter search holds (editorial frame) Nothing in the source contradicts this framing; Anthony's own wording is "was actually the first time anybody even referred" — presented as his recollection. (same URL)
4 The title was a King-of-the-Hill joke, not a formal leadership office holds (editorial frame) "Yeah, I elected myself."; "Stackchain was like a King of the Hill kind of thing... I was declaring that at that moment in time, I was the King of the Hill." (same URL)

Totals: 4 clauses: 4 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

Note: entry date 2022-07-18 (basis: reported event date) vs interview published 2025-01-13 — basis is labeled on the entry and the interview itself says the stack was "posted on July 18, 2022"; no mismatch.

ev-003 — event-2022-07-19-op-backstack-experimentation-almost-immediat

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 An archived Anthony post says "I'm adding a soft fork to the stackchain. Op.backstack" holds Embedded metadata text: "I'm adding a soft fork to the stackchain. Op.backstack" (canonicalUrl matches the cited URL exactly). URL: https://x.com/AnthonyDessauer/status/1549500074434052097
2 It establishes early playful protocol language, not a demonstrated, adopted independent sidechain holds (editorial frame) The source is a single one-line proposal post; nothing in it demonstrates an actual sidechain. (same URL)

Totals: 2 clauses: 2 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

Note: weak link for future re-runs — browser.open is domain-policy-blocked for x.com; text recovered from curl-body metadata this run. A login-wall render would flip this to unreadable.

ev-004 — event-2022-07-20-accessibility-becomes-a-protocol-question

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 Derek Ross's NEWSTACK proposal sought numbered, approved sidechains holds "AUTHOR: Derek Ross (twitter.com/derekmross)"; "Each NEWSTACK must be numbered and approved by the majority of the longest chain of the Stackchain." URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stackchainsats/stackchain/main/sips/sip-0001.txt
2 and is marked Rejected holds "STATUS: Rejected". (same URL)
3 Semisol's Pooling proposal is Superseded by active SIP-0003 Stackjoin holds "AUTHOR: Semisol (twitter.com/semisol_public)"; "STATUS: Superseded"; "SUPERSEDED-BY: SIP-0003" / "TITLE: Stackjoin"; "STATUS: Active"; "SUPERSEDES: SIP-0002". URLs: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stackchainsats/stackchain/main/sips/sip-0002.txt, https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stackchainsats/stackchain/main/sips/sip-0003.txt
4 Stackjoins allowed small purchases and orphaned receipts to be assembled into a valid block holds "attach another purchase to their or others' orphaned stacks, or pool together funds to produce a stack." URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stackchainsats/stackchain/main/sips/sip-0003.txt
5 proposed NEWSTACK approval rules should not be presented as actual adoption holds (editorial frame) SIP-0001 carries STATUS: Rejected; nothing in the three SIPs shows the approval rules adopted. URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stackchainsats/stackchain/main/sips/sip-0001.txt

Totals: 5 clauses: 5 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

Note: all three SIPs show "CREATED: 2022-7-20", matching the entry's "basis: document creation dates". Byte figures are stable plain-text files.

ev-005 — event-2022-07-20-receipt-provenance-becomes-part-of-consensus

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 Derek Ross's SIP-0004 addresses duplicate receipt use. holds SIP header: "TITLE: DOUBLE SPEND PREVENTION" / "AUTHOR: Derek Ross (twitter.com/derekmross)"; ABSTRACT: "This SIP aims to stop double spending from happening." URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stackchainsats/stackchain/main/sips/sip-0004.txt
2 The current repository text permits purchases up to three hours older, with specified exceptions, holds Repo text: "Any purchase that's 3 hours older than the originating Tweet will be rejected unless proof is provided that it was orphaned or published by another pleb." URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/stackchainsats/stackchain/main/sips/sip-0004.txt
3 while the European Bitcoiners article preserves a ten-minute version. holds Article's SIP-0004 quote: "Any purchase that's 10 minutes older than the originating Tweet will be rejected unless proof is provided that it was orphaned or published by another pleb." URL: https://europeanbitcoiners.com/what-the-heck-is-stackchain/
4 These are different textual states, not a reason to silently rewrite the early rule. holds (editorial frame) Both textual states verified verbatim above (3-hour repo text vs 10-minute article text); nothing in either source contradicts the framing.

Totals: 4 clauses: 4 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

Note: entry date basis (document creation date) matches the SIP header "CREATED: 2022-7-20" verbatim. The European Bitcoiners article is a living page carrying later material; no clause asserts the article's date.

ev-006 — event-2022-07-22-skinner-s-405-420-and-the-social-fork-questi

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 The European Bitcoiners article embeds Skinner's "Blocks 405-420" post holds Article embeds "> Blocks 405-420" attributed "— Stackchain Skinner (@YoshishiSatoshi)", dated "July 22, 2022". URL: https://europeanbitcoiners.com/what-the-heck-is-stackchain/
2 and describes the fork around securing 420. holds Article: "The notable stackheight 420 … With his legendary skinner stacking tactic he was able to secure this blocking leading to a fork of the chain leaving nothing but astonishment behind." (same URL)
3 A same-day Anthony post explicitly names "Skinner Stack(n) / Skinner Stacking(v)" unreadable Cited X post behind a login wall: browser.open blocked by tool policy; curl returns HTTP 200 / 100,664 B but only the login-wall JS shell — no post content retrievable.
4 and asks whether to social-fork to prevent it. unreadable Same as #3 — the question's wording rests on the unreadable X post.
5 That contemporary response makes this a documented governance argument as well as a memorable large stack; unreadable The "governance argument" characterization rests on the unreadable Anthony post. (The "memorable large stack" half is independently supported by clause 2 evidence.)
6 the original Skinner post was not freshly recoverable. unverified Claim about the archive's own research process — cannot be verified from any cited source.

Totals: 6 clauses: 2 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 3 unreadable / 1 unverified.

Note: the article also embeds Derek Ross's July 22, 2022 notable-stacks tweet, consistent with the entry's 2022-07-22 date basis.

ev-007 — event-2022-08-17-bitcoin-beach-transfers-leave-a-transaction

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 Anthony posted two distributions to Bitcoin Beach, each described as 10 million sats. unreadable Both cited X posts behind a login wall (see SOURCES). The entry's own "From the sources" quotes display the post texts, but these are the archive's own captures — not verifiable against the live source. Chain data independently shows exactly-10,000,000-sat outputs in both txs (see #2), consistent with the quoted amounts.
2 Both transaction IDs resolve to confirmed transactions with a 10-million-sat output; holds blockstream API: tx 0a6c94c4…edb -> "confirmed": true, "block_height": 749873, vout values [10000000, 1001332]; tx 97d4786a…9e1 -> "confirmed": true, "block_height": 749880, vout values [10000000, 996038]. URLs: https://blockstream.info/api/tx/0a6c94c43d8543944b7069732f1d9f9aa0d0452ba1632c01aff7f7c6a71d9edb, https://blockstream.info/api/tx/97d4786a46d323f0a5395d202b67bc5dc2523069f8afb0db3951be663b9589e1
3 chain data corroborates the outputs but does not independently identify the recipient. holds The API vout records only scriptpubkey addresses — no recipient names or "Bitcoin Beach" labels appear in the chain data for either tx.
4 The public post is the attribution to Bitcoin Beach. unreadable The attribution rests entirely on the two unreadable X posts (#1). Nothing in the chain data names Bitcoin Beach.

Totals: 4 clauses: 2 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 2 unreadable.

Note: both txs confirmed 2022-08-17 (block_time 20:21:11 UTC and 22:05:23 UTC), matching the entry's date basis. Explorer page byte figures not byte-stable (rendered/JS).

ev-008 — event-2022-08-18-the-bitcoin-beach-campaign-closes-and-hodlon

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 Anthony announced that the last #Stacks4BitcoinBeach donations were on their way. holds "The last of sats donated to #Stacks4BitcoinBeach are on their way." — posted by AnthonyDessauer (https://x.com/AnthonyDessauer/status/1560325688481026048), published 2022-08-18T18:00:08Z (2:00 PM EDT Aug 18).
2 StackchainQuant's October account also embeds Yellow's August 18 donation appeal holds Byline: "This is an opinion editorial by StackchainQuant." Embeds tweet by "yellow.🍌🍞 (@ICOffenderII)" dated "August 18, 2022": "HELPING HODLONAUT IS HELPING BITCOIN!!!" URL: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/how-5-bitcoin-purchase-cascaded-into-1-5-million-viral-movement
3 …and reports several thousand dollars raised under #Stacks4Hodlonaut. holds "Stackchainers raised several thousand dollars using the tag #Stacks4Hodlonaut to help fund Hodlonaut in his legal battle against Craig Wright" (same article).
4 Do not mistake the embedded appeal alone for a complete donation ledger. holds Editorial caution; nothing in the cited sources contradicts it.

Totals: 4 clauses: 4 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

ev-009 — event-2022-08-21-block-1414-becomes-the-first-million-target

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 Contemporary archived posts ask who will take 1414 and announce the approach to the first million. holds "Stack 1414 represents 1 million cuck bucks dumped into Stackchain." / "Whose going to get stack 1414?" (https://x.com/AnthonyDessauer/status/1561482847872962561); "We are only 14 stacks away from the historic block that will mark 1 million cuck bucks dumped into #stackchain" (https://x.com/AnthonyDessauer/status/1561523237984432128)
2 An August 22 post describes Stackchain as approximately $1 million. holds "Stackchain ~1 million dollars" (https://x.com/AnthonyDessauer/status/1561850265321345024, published 2022-08-22T22:58:15Z)
3 These show the milestone's anticipation and recognition, not the exact winning receipt. holds Editorial characterization; consistent with the posts, nothing contradicts.
4 A clean uninterrupted sum of heights 5 through 1414 is $1,000,395; that model is not an audit of all forks or receipts. holds Arithmetic independently verified: (5+1414)*1410//2 = 1,000,395 (python3). Caveat is editorial; no contradiction.

Totals: 4 clauses: 4 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

ev-010 — event-2022-08-24-a-practical-fork-resolution-offer-at-1438-14

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 Anthony offered a dollar and told the other participant to combine a 1438 purchase into 1439 to resolve a fork. holds "Grab my dollar and combine your 1438 to get 1439 and resolve the fork." — posted by AnthonyDessauer, https://x.com/AnthonyDessauer/status/1562570634915328000
2 This is a concrete record of people trying to repair competing receipt chains, but the retrieved post does not establish the final accepted branch. holds Editorial characterization; the post proposes a resolution but states no outcome, so nothing contradicts.

Totals: 2 clauses: 2 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

ev-011 — event-2022-08-28-the-fork-of-1492

# Clause Grade Settling evidence (verbatim)
1 Loko's retrospective dates the contest to August 28: @caroghero challenged @sathoarder for 1492 holds "August 28th, 2022 late in the morning... @caroghero decided to fork the chain (& the Stackchain Legend, @sathoarder) and call #1492 his." URL: https://www.stackchainmagazine.net/the-fork-of-1492/
2 Tao, Vee, Chewy, Bama and others supported competing branches. holds "Tao and Vee had a plan"; "a stack from the meme legend, Chewy, followed by a stack from Vee & Tao"; "he got the legend BamaHodl and others on his side" (same article).
3 Loko says he redirected a misplaced 1498–1500 multiblock onto the newcomer's branch. holds "an anon came in and stacked Blocks 1498-1500... I caught the anon's post early and DM'd the anon and said, 'The Stackchain Tip... is here. Just repost here and you should be good :)'... he moved his stacks." (same article)
4 The October 2022 StackchainQuant article independently confirms 1492 as a notable fork holds "This was the case for many blocks including blocks 888, 1492" — Bitcoin Magazine article, datePublished 2022-10-05 (October 2022), byline StackchainQuant. URL: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/how-5-bitcoin-purchase-cascaded-into-1-5-million-viral-movement
5 …but the tactical narrative remains Loko's perspective, not an objective judgment of participants. holds Editorial caveat; nothing in sources contradicts.

Totals: 5 clauses: 5 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 0 unreadable.

Batch A totals (ev-002..ev-011, 10 entries)

40 clauses: 34 holds / 0 overstated / 0 unsupported / 0 contradicted / 5 unreadable / 1 unverified.

Running Q10 totals (pilot + batch A): 45 clauses: 39 holds / 5 unreadable / 1 unverified.

Unresolved across batch A: nothing graded against its source lane — the unreadable/unverified rows are the honest limitation: X posts are behind a login wall from tool-policy-blocked x.com (only embedded-HTML metadata recoverable per-post, inconsistently), and clause ev-006#6 asserts the archive's own research process, which no cited source can settle.

Reference in new issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink