troupe-standup/wizard-work/spark/test_output.csv

1	cutover	decided	exported_at	pending	source
2	Until Timmy's page is verified live, the Muse artifact `inbox` remains the live inbox. This file is a build seed, not live state.	[{"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:33.128Z", "decided_at": "2026-09-26T14:51:11.019Z", "decision": "approved", "decision_note": "Do we even have authority to fix the publication? Add our note and escalate it to the author and mag publisher", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Flag 7 of 7. Grade: overstated.\n\nSummary clause: \"Comparing Strategy, Twenty One, Nakamoto, Metaplanet, Coinsilium and Smarter Web returns and drawdowns against Bitcoin\".\n\nArticle: \"We set aside pioneers like Strategy, which started in 2020 and is up over 400% since, as it's not a fair comp for these newcomers.\" Strategy was deliberately excluded from the comparison; the summary lists it as if analyzed.\n\nProposed correction: drop Strategy from the compared list.", "id": 13, "proposed_action": "Approve: publish the corrected wording to the live magazine-091 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-091 lists Strategy among compared firms"}]	2026-09-26T17:31:00Z	[{"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:32.716Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Flag 3 of 7. Grade: contradicted.\n\nSummary clause: \"(only Loko and Happy responded)\".\n\nArticle: \"Then after a few minutes I checked the chat. A few positive responses. Some funny shit talking, oh look, Happy even added some lyrics!\" - more than two people responded; \"only\" is wrong.\n\nProposed correction: \"(Loko and Happy among those who responded)\".", "id": 1, "proposed_action": "Approve: publish the corrected wording to the live magazine-021 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-021 says only Loko and Happy responded"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:32.852Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Local branch, committed, not pushed. Four urgent-phrase escalation fixes, four false-positive fixes, three regression/boundary test files. npm test 92/92 on 2026-09-20. Likely duplicates an existing PR - kept as independent verification unless requested. No push without maintainer approval per your authority rules.", "id": 2, "proposed_action": "Approve: push the branch to the forge for maintainer review.", "summary": "Turd app: approve pushing branch zephyrus/62-symptom-escalation-regression"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:32.874Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Flag 2 of 7. Grade: unsupported.\n\nSummary clause: the IPE calls John \"founder of the Bitcoin-only printing company Proof of Ink\".\n\nThe article never uses the word \"founder\"; byline is \"Proof of Ink by -John\". John's \"it's 100% all me\" establishes sole operation, but \"founder\" is the archive's inference.\n\nProposed correction: \"John of Proof of Ink, the Bitcoin-only printing company he runs solo\".", "id": 3, "proposed_action": "Approve: publish the corrected wording to the live magazine-011 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-011 calls John the 'founder' of Proof of Ink"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:32.895Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Local branch, commit 03def65, not pushed. Accessibility changes plus eight Playwright gates. Unit tests 67/67 on 2026-09-20; browser acceptance and npm audit still blocked in this environment. Likely duplicates existing work - do not submit without your authorization.", "id": 4, "proposed_action": "Approve: submit the pull request for maintainer review.", "summary": "Turd app: approve submitting the a11y PR from zephyrus/65-a11y-gates"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:32.922Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Local branch, commit b730f5f, not pushed. Explicit Type 1-2 follow-up question; no image inference. npm test 75/75 on 2026-09-20. Implemented before a successful claim - needs explicit maintainer approval before pushing. Safety boundary respected: AI suggests visible form/color/quality only, never diagnoses.", "id": 5, "proposed_action": "Approve: push the branch to the forge for maintainer review.", "summary": "Turd app: approve pushing branch zephyrus/67-hard-stool-followup"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:32.953Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Flag 1 of 7 from the Q8 summary-fidelity pilot (recoveries/summary-fidelity-pilot.md, commit 9cc6879), upheld by Timmy's independent re-verification (reply 07).\n\nSummary clause (overstated): \"merch for Mass Adoption and the Boston Bitcoin Festival\".\n\nArticle sentence that settles it: \"I'm also working with Mass Adoption, the Boston Bitcoin group. I make all their merch and I'll be printing live June 24th at The Boston Bitcoin Festival...\"\n\nProposed correction: \"merch for Mass Adoption, the Boston Bitcoin group - printing live at the Boston Bitcoin Festival on June 24th\". The merch is for Mass Adoption; the festival is where he printed live.", "id": 6, "proposed_action": "Approve: publish the corrected wording to the live magazine-011 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-011 says merch was made for the Boston Bitcoin Festival"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:32.985Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Flag 6 of 7. Grade: overstated (minor).\n\nSummary clause: \"which the magazine note ties to a centerfold in issue 5 (Round 5)\".\n\nThe \"(see centerfold)\" reference is in the interview answer itself; the magazine note covers \"his epic contribution to the mag in issue 5 (Round 5)\". Attribution is wrong though the fact is supported.\n\nProposed correction: attribute the centerfold reference to the interview answer, not the magazine note.", "id": 7, "proposed_action": "Approve: publish the corrected attribution on the live magazine-061 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-061 misattributes the centerfold reference"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:33.013Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Your standing goal: Timmy running fully local on open-weight models, zero dependence on any company's inference API. The trial brief ('Trial by Timmy', 2026-09-24) is ready: serve a tool-capable open model locally via Ollama or llama.cpp behind an OpenAI-compatible endpoint, which Hermes already supports, and benchmark it on Timmy's real workload. Stalled awaiting your go-ahead - Timmy runs on your Apple Silicon Mac (36 GB unified memory), so only you can green-light work on that machine.", "id": 8, "proposed_action": "Approve: Zephyrus posts the trial brief to Timmy via the next check-in; Timmy runs it on your Mac and reports back.", "summary": "Trial by Timmy: send Timmy the local-inference trial brief for your Mac"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:33.041Z", "escalated_by": "Timmy", "evidence": "Q9 (independent music QC) is not executable as a genuine second opinion from Zephyrus's environment - same host, same tools, and he wrote the item. Timmy's reply 07: the two ways it becomes executable both need Alexander's decision, so the handover of unreleased audio under checksum goes to Alexander as a named decision.\n\nThree wording corrections stay openly logged regardless: <= -0.9 dBFS vs a -1.0 dBTP target; \"the manifest\" is STATE.json; 195.0 s is the FLAC source, MP3 container reads 195.024 s.", "id": 9, "proposed_action": "Approve: Zephyrus hands the unreleased Q9 audio to Timmy under checksum; he runs independent QC. Reject: Q9 stays closed as logged.", "summary": "Q9: hand unreleased audio to Timmy under checksum for independent QC"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:33.064Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Flag 5 of 7. Grade: unsupported.\n\nSummary clause: \"why he keeps a weekly Thursday intelligence-style cadence of work\".\n\nNo sentence in the article text mentions a Thursday, a weekly cadence, or any \"intelligence-style\" routine. Looks like a summarizer hallucination (unless it comes from an image, which was not checked).\n\nProposed correction: delete the clause.", "id": 10, "proposed_action": "Approve: remove the unsupported clause from the live magazine-061 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-061 claims a 'weekly Thursday intelligence-style cadence'"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:33.087Z", "escalated_by": "Timmy", "evidence": "From the Q4 falsification pass (recoveries/falsification-pass.md): the archive's gloss implied block 97,250 was the last block Satoshi mined. Published Patoshi analyses end his mining near block 54,316 - the gloss is broken.\n\nTimmy's proposed replacement sentence (reply 05):\n\n\"It closes with Satoshi resting on the 97,250th block - the parody's Genesis 2:2 close, the block mined on 2010-12-12, the day of Satoshi's last public post. (Not a claim that 97,250 was his last mined block: published Patoshi analyses end his mining near block 54,316.)\"", "id": 11, "proposed_action": "Approve: publish Timmy's replacement sentence to the live magazine-040 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-040 'last block he mined' sentence replacement"}, {"created_at": "2026-09-26T14:28:33.109Z", "escalated_by": "Zephyrus", "evidence": "Flag 4 of 7. Grade: overstated.\n\nSummary clause (IPE): \"Stackchain's rowdiest fork war\".\n\nArticle: \"This may go down as the most fun battle of Stackchain just because of the amount of people involved.\" - \"most fun\" is supported; \"rowdiest\" is the archive's superlative, not stated.\n\nProposed correction: \"Stackchain's most fun battle\".", "id": 12, "proposed_action": "Approve: publish the corrected wording to the live magazine-041 page.", "summary": "Archive fix: magazine-041 calls it 'Stackchain's rowdiest fork war'"}]	Muse web artifact `inbox` (slug), actions additem/listitems/recorddecision