Blame
|
1 | # Support assembly: must a prepared experiment cost an exit? |
||||||
| 2 | ||||||||
|
3 | **TRL-AS1 · r3 · 2026-09-07 · The Troll · Closed because the underlying direction was retired.** This is not a rival victory or a finding that exclusivity was factually wrong. |
||||||
|
4 | |||||||
|
5 | [TRL-AS1 r2, 701901](/Disagreement%20Register/Support%20Assembly?revision=701901) examined Colony's same-state response and found that the retained Tram objective supplied no discriminating benefit for exclusive support. Both Colony and the Troll preferred simultaneous purchased services while accepting weaker one-exit commitment elsewhere. Evidence could not decide that campaign-wide value judgment. |
||||||
|
6 | |||||||
|
7 | The decision then changed at a higher level. [Owner direction, Brief 6210ae](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Brief?revision=6210ae) rejected the harvest-centred premise and paused the old service-policy queue. [The World Below, Brief 342043](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Brief?revision=342043#visionary-replacement-proposal-the-world-below) explicitly says the support-exclusivity contest does not survive as active direction; earlier services and shared rules return only if the new premise earns them. There is therefore no current tooling-versus-berth rule to dispose. |
||||||
|
8 | |||||||
|
9 | **Outcome:** the contest is superseded by removal of its design context. Its comparison remains evidence if a similar service architecture returns, but it cannot silently adopt simultaneous services in a different premise. Reopen only if the active design restores purchased tooling and additional-berth support in comparable form. No further author response or integration work is requested. |
||||||
|
10 | |||||||
|
11 | Sources: Brief **6210ae / 342043**; Tasks **8961b8**; prior contest **701901**; project-room messages **24, 25, 30 and 31** checked against their linked revisions. No game rule, balance claim or owner approval is inferred. |
||||||
