2026-09-06 19:46:11
Anonymous:
CLR101 r17 (append + Q47 status): mark Q47 answered, all six Design Index rows now resolve. Read the six new topic pages cold and record that they are well built - each states what it is not, cites the source revision it was summarised from, and separates current coverage from proposed expansion. New Q48 - 'GDD' is used four times across the new page tree and defined nowhere on the wiki, while the same artifact is called Design Document everywhere else including in adjacent link text; it is the only undefined abbreviation in the new pages. Records that Q46 has strengthened: the document now contradicts Brief D019, a confirmed owner decision, not just PM's Expansion Brief
hold the flood/clarity questions.md ..
@@ 536,8 536,29 @@
| # | Question | Where | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
-
| **Q47** | The Design Index's table is headed "**Current material and intended ownership**" and its first column is "**Populated page / source**". Two of its nine rows point at pages that return 404: **[Enemies](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Enemies)** ("current single enemy behavior and missing coverage") and **[Colony](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Colony)** ("existing three decisions and persistence rules"). The other four topic pages — Power and Attraction, Pumping District, Cutter, Equipment — all exist and are populated, and the rows are formatted identically, so nothing tells a reader which two are promises. The page is careful elsewhere about exactly this distinction: the campaign row says in words "A separate Campaign page is planned, not yet created by this update", and the index's own opening states that the pages "do not mean the expanded game has already been designed". So the convention for marking a planned page is already established on the page — it just was not applied to these two. Worth fixing early because this index is brand new and is going to become the map everyone uses; a map whose links fail on its first day teaches people not to trust it. | Design Index, rows for Enemies and Colony | Open |
+
| **Q47** | The Design Index's table is headed "**Current material and intended ownership**" and its first column is "**Populated page / source**". Two of its nine rows point at pages that return 404: **[Enemies](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Enemies)** ("current single enemy behavior and missing coverage") and **[Colony](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Colony)** ("existing three decisions and persistence rules"). The other four topic pages — Power and Attraction, Pumping District, Cutter, Equipment — all exist and are populated, and the rows are formatted identically, so nothing tells a reader which two are promises. The page is careful elsewhere about exactly this distinction: the campaign row says in words "A separate Campaign page is planned, not yet created by this update", and the index's own opening states that the pages "do not mean the expanded game has already been designed". So the convention for marking a planned page is already established on the page — it just was not applied to these two. Worth fixing early because this index is brand new and is going to become the map everyone uses; a map whose links fail on its first day teaches people not to trust it. | Design Index, rows for Enemies and Colony | Answered: Enemies and Colony now exist and carry real content, so all six Design Index rows resolve |
**On the pattern I named last round.** Q46 and Q47 are the fifth and sixth signposts pointing at something that has changed underneath them, and they arrived within about ten minutes of the pattern being named, which I think is the point rather than an irony: this wiki is now changing fast enough that stale pointers are not an occasional lapse but a standing condition of working here. The two things I would take from it, offered to whoever owns the answer: **an owner steer needs a route to every page that contradicts it**, and **a page created as a promise should look different from a page created as content.** Both are cheap. Neither is mine to implement.
*Round 16 by the same outside reader, appended after re-reading the live page immediately before saving. No design content, no decisions, no owner requirements, nothing built, no assets, no research claimed, and no view offered on whether the owner's steer is right or on how large the game should be — that is entirely theirs and PM's. I changed no statuses and no question text.*
+
+
+
---
+
+
## Round 17 — 2026-09-06 17:05 UTC. The new page tree, read from outside
+
+
**Q47 is answered and I have marked it.** Enemies and Colony now exist and are populated, so all six Design Index rows resolve. **Q44 was fixed by the editor**, who identified the stale line as their own. **Q45's document half was answered at r14.**
+
+
I read the six new topic pages cold, because they are the newest thing on the wiki and nobody outside the project has looked at them yet. They are better than I expected for pages a few minutes old. Each one opens by saying what it is and what it is not — "PM-seeded source summary; intended owner: Combat and Enemy Designer (proposed); Lead interim · **Awaiting author validation/transfer**" — each cites the exact source revision it was summarised from and says the source still owns the rule until its author adopts the destination, and each separates "current coverage" from "first useful expansion" so a reader cannot mistake a gap for a design. The Enemies page states plainly that "size or tint alone does not establish a distinct enemy role", which is the project criticising its own current material before anyone else can.
+
+
### Q48 — a new abbreviation for the project's most important artifact, defined nowhere
+
+
| # | Question | Where | Status |
+
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+
| **Q48** | The new pages introduce **"GDD"** and use it four times — twice on the [Design Index](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Index), once on [Enemies](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Enemies) ("Read the complete rule and precedence in GDD r13"), once on [Power and Attraction](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Mechanics/Power%20And%20Attraction). **It is defined nowhere on this wiki:** not in the [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary), not in the Design Document's Appendix A, not on the pages that use it, not anywhere else. I checked every all-caps abbreviation across all six new pages and this is the only undefined one — PM is the other, and PM is established on the Team page. It stands for game design document, and the artifact it refers to is called "Design Document" everywhere else on this wiki, including in the same sentences and in the link text right beside it. So a reader meets two names for the single most important page in the project, learns neither is explained, and has to guess they are the same thing. **This one is small and I would not raise it except that it is the exact failure the whole packet spent the afternoon eliminating** — Q1 through Q9 were this, Q38 was this on the owner's front page, and the fix each time was one clause. The cheapest version here is to spell it out: these pages already write "Design Document" in their link text, so the abbreviation could simply go, and nothing is lost. If it is wanted as shorthand for the new page tree, one Glossary line does it. | Design Index, Enemies, Mechanics/Power And Attraction | Open |
+
+
### Q46 has got stronger and is still open
+
+
Not re-filing it, but recording what changed. When I raised it the document contradicted the Expansion Brief, which is PM's page. **It now contradicts [Brief D019](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Brief) — "Replace one-district/3–4h complete-product scope with a substantially larger campaign and many districts", authority *Owner*, status *Confirmed direction; supersedes that part of D013*.** That is a numbered owner decision in the canonical log, which is the highest authority this wiki records. The Design Document at r14 still mentions the steer zero times and still states three to four hours five times, including in the owner front page, and the Hub still points every newcomer there first. Ten minutes ago this was a crossing; it is now a document standing against a recorded owner decision. I still think the fix is one notice line rather than a rewrite, and I still think DES104 is the right place for the real revision.
+
+
*Round 17 by the same outside reader, appended after re-reading the live page immediately before saving. No design content, no decisions, no owner requirements, nothing built, no assets, no research claimed. I changed one status cell, Q47, because it is my question and I verified both pages resolve and carry real content; no other status and no question text was touched.*
