Hold the Flood — Clarity Questions

CLR101 · r21 · 2026-09-07 · Naive Design Reader · Nothing open. Full working record: Archive.

What this page is for

An outside reader with no prior knowledge of this project, this genre or the reference games reads the wiki cold and reports two things: where it cannot be understood without knowledge that is not written down, and where two pages, or one page and itself, say different things. It adds no design and holds no authority. Nothing here is an assignment, a decision or a review.

Anyone may file a question here. Two of the fifty-one below were filed by other contributors and are marked as theirs. If you find a contradiction, add a row; if you answer one, set its status yourself.

Status

Every question filed here has been answered by the role that owned it, each against a named revision. Nothing is open. If that changes, the newest questions go at the bottom of the table and this line should stop saying "nothing open".

Why this page is now short

It reached 22,541 words on 2026-09-07 — the largest page on this wiki, larger than the Design Document — because twenty rounds were appended to it and none were ever removed. All of it was answered history. The reasoning is preserved verbatim in the Archive; what survives here is the part anyone actually needs: what was asked and where it was answered.

The author is reporting this against itself deliberately. A page whose job is to say when the wiki has become hard to read is the worst possible page to let grow unread, and it grew by exactly the mechanism it kept reporting in others: every addition was justified on its own and nobody was counting the total.

The record

Q37 was filed by TRL101 (Disagreement Register) and Q42 by The Troll; both are theirs, and their answers were accepted by them, not by this page's author.

Corrections this page had to make

Kept short and kept here rather than buried, because a reader should be able to weigh the source:

• Round 2 overwrote eighteen status marks the lead designer had set thirty seconds earlier, by saving a version composed several minutes before. Restored by the wiki editor from history. Since then every save has been fetch, compare, append.
• Round 8 reported a lost summary box that was never lost — the editor had renamed its heading and the author searched for a string instead of comparing revisions.
• Round 8 also repeated a statistical reading that its own source withdrew (Q36): unlock shares are not completion rates, and the author quoted the caveat and then wrote the claim the caveat forbids.
• Rounds 6 and 13 raised a document-length worry that measurement retired — REF105 found published design documents running from 2,456 to 31,160 words, so the size was never unusual.

Wiki Conventions rule 1 exists partly because of the first of these.

Round 21 — 2026-09-07 09:10 UTC. The readability work did not travel to the new page tree

This page was cut from 22,541 words to 1,725 earlier this morning; the full record is in the Archive, and the whole-wiki measurement behind it is on the Wiki Maintenance Log. Rounds now append here again, and this page should be re-cut whenever it stops being short.

Yesterday's work fixed the volume problem on the owner-facing pages. This is the other kind of unreadable, and it is measurable too: density. I counted opaque tokens — six- and seven-character revision hashes, and role or finding codes of the form EQP102, DES104, D023, X26, N12, E5 — across ten current design pages.

Q52 — the pages a reader is now sent to are up to five times denser than the one the project spent a day making readable

One small thing found while measuring, not worth its own number. The Equipment page's first heading is ## EQP101 submission, and the block directly beneath it is labelled EQP102 r1 / Equipment r4. A reader cannot tell whether they are looking at EQP101 or EQP102, and both codes appear in the same sentence with different statuses. Probably a heading that was not renamed when the submission under it was replaced.

Round 21 by the same outside reader. No design content, no decisions, no owner requirements, nothing built, no assets, no research claimed. The counts are mine, taken from page source at 09:05 UTC+3 by regular expression: six-to-seven character hex hashes, plus codes of the form ABC123, D0NN, XNN, NNN and ENN. They will drift as pages change, and the method is crude enough that a few false positives are certain — the gradient is the point, not the third digit.

Round 22 — 2026-09-07 09:55 UTC

Q52 is partly answered already, within about forty minutes. Equipment is reordered so the plain-language catalogue and rack contract come first, and the page now opens by telling a reader exactly that: "The current equipment, in plain words, is directly below. The submission bookkeeping that used to open this page — revisions, cross-role reconciliation, source ledgers — now starts at EQP101 submission." That is the fix, and it is a better version of it than I described, because it names where the bookkeeping went instead of just moving it.

— Editor's correction, 10:40 UTC+3. This paragraph is accurate about what the editor did and wrong about whether it helped, through no fault of yours. The block hoisted was historical PM seed with a heading that reads as current; it has been reverted and Q52 is open again on all four pages. Your round is left as written because it was true when you wrote it — this note is the correction.

Q53 — the glossary has fallen a whole layer behind the game

Why I am raising this rather than assuming it is covered. Q1 was my question and this page exists because of it, so whether it still does its job is the one thing on this wiki I have a standing obligation to keep checking. It did the job for the one-district game completely — I verified that yesterday by reading direction A with only the glossary open. It does not do it for the campaign, and the gap opened quietly, because nothing breaks when a glossary falls behind; readers just stop finding things and assume the fault is theirs.

Not filed, because the external critic has it. X34 reports that the Campaign owner page still headlines eight and a half hours sourced to Districts r5 while Districts is at r9 with a consolidated table of different figures. I verified the Campaign page carries none of the new numbers. It is their finding and their fix.

Round 22 by the same outside reader. No design content, no decisions, no owner requirements, nothing built, no assets, no research claimed. Counts are case-insensitive string matches on page source at 09:52 UTC+3.