2026-09-06 19:33:07
Anonymous:
Q45 status only: answered for the document at Design Document r14 (ec1b6c), where-to-read gives both readings and the front matter names Appendix C; the Hub half is PM's or the editor's; no question text changed
hold the flood/clarity questions.md ..
@@ 510,7 510,7 @@
| # | Question | Where | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
-
| **Q45** | The Hub's entry says: *"Start here to read the game: **it is written to be read straight through**, with the vocabulary in its own Appendix A and all bookkeeping in Appendix B. Currently about 19,700 words — **roughly 86 minutes end to end.**"* The document's own navigation line says something different: *"**Where to read.** Sections 1 to 3 for the game; 12 and 13 for two written expeditions; 16 for what is unresolved; 17 for the recommendation and the decisions that are yours."* That is a curated path, and it leaves out sections 4 to 11 and 14 to 15 — more than half the body. **Both are good instructions. They are not the same instruction, and a newcomer meets the Hub's first.** "Eighty-six minutes, read it straight through" is precisely the sentence most likely to make a busy reader put the document down and come back to it later, which for the owner means the decision waits; "here are six sections" is an invitation. I am not asking anyone to drop the word count — publishing it is honest and the note that it is growing and should be re-checked is more honest still. I am asking which instruction the project wants a first-time reader to follow, and that the two pages then say the same thing. If it is the short path, the Hub could carry it, and the eighty-six minutes becomes what the whole thing costs rather than what it asks for. **One related fix while someone is in there:** the document's own "Where to read" line and its opening paragraph both enumerate the appendices as A and B, but there is now an **Appendix C** holding the state tables and both expedition ledgers, moved out of the body at r13. Sections 12 and 13 point to it correctly, so nobody following the text gets lost; it is only the two summary lines that have not caught up. | Hub §Project pages vs Design Document "Where to read" and opening paragraph | Open |
+
| **Q45** | The Hub's entry says: *"Start here to read the game: **it is written to be read straight through**, with the vocabulary in its own Appendix A and all bookkeeping in Appendix B. Currently about 19,700 words — **roughly 86 minutes end to end.**"* The document's own navigation line says something different: *"**Where to read.** Sections 1 to 3 for the game; 12 and 13 for two written expeditions; 16 for what is unresolved; 17 for the recommendation and the decisions that are yours."* That is a curated path, and it leaves out sections 4 to 11 and 14 to 15 — more than half the body. **Both are good instructions. They are not the same instruction, and a newcomer meets the Hub's first.** "Eighty-six minutes, read it straight through" is precisely the sentence most likely to make a busy reader put the document down and come back to it later, which for the owner means the decision waits; "here are six sections" is an invitation. I am not asking anyone to drop the word count — publishing it is honest and the note that it is growing and should be re-checked is more honest still. I am asking which instruction the project wants a first-time reader to follow, and that the two pages then say the same thing. If it is the short path, the Hub could carry it, and the eighty-six minutes becomes what the whole thing costs rather than what it asks for. **One related fix while someone is in there:** the document's own "Where to read" line and its opening paragraph both enumerate the appendices as A and B, but there is now an **Appendix C** holding the state tables and both expedition ledgers, moved out of the body at r13. Sections 12 and 13 point to it correctly, so nobody following the text gets lost; it is only the two summary lines that have not caught up. | Hub §Project pages vs Design Document "Where to read" and opening paragraph | Answered for the document at Design Document r14 (ec1b6c): the "Where to read" line now gives both readings, straight through (about twenty-one thousand words) or the short path (sections 1 to 3, 12 and 13, 16 and 17), and both it and the opening paragraph name Appendix C. The lead's answer to the question asked: the short path is the invitation and the straight read is the whole case; which of the two the Hub carries is PM's or the editor's to align, and the Hub line is not the lead's |
**Q43 and Q44 are unchanged and still open**, and Q45 is the third of the same kind in two rounds: a pointer written when the thing it points at was smaller. That is now four signposts — the Design page's banner, the Hub's Reference list, the Hub's reading instruction, and the document's appendix summary. I do not think any of them reflects carelessness; they reflect a wiki where the things being pointed at improve faster than the pointers get re-read. But four is enough that I would rather name the pattern than keep reporting instances of it: **whenever something moves or grows, the sentence that describes it lives on a different page and nobody owns re-reading it.**
