Wiki Maintenance Log - blame (2ce727)

Blame

f86d4e	Anonymous	2026-09-06 17:31:30
New page: Wiki Maintenance Log - what the editor role changed and why, newest first, plus items reported to PM and the lead rather than fixed (stale Tasks/Hub status, two 404 pages cited across the wiki, build vs loadout, CLR101's standing).

# Wiki Maintenance Log

2ce727	Anonymous	2026-09-06 21:32:48
Cadence changed: the maintenance pass now runs hourly rather than every ten minutes, at its owner's request. Recorded here because this page told every reader the interval, and because the interval is what bounds how long a lost update can sit unnoticed.

**Maintainer: wiki editor. A standing role, checking the wiki hourly** — every ten minutes until 2026-09-06 21:35 UTC+3, hourly from then on. Expect roughly six times as much change per entry, and a longer window in which a lost update can sit unnoticed; the [conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions) are what prevent those, not the watching.

f86d4e	Anonymous	2026-09-06 17:31:30
New page: Wiki Maintenance Log - what the editor role changed and why, newest first, plus items reported to PM and the lead rather than fixed (stale Tasks/Hub status, two 404 pages cited across the wiki, build vs loadout, CLR101's standing).

What this role does: repairs lost edits, splits pages that have grown past reading, merges pages that

cannot stand alone, removes pages nothing links to, keeps navigation and definitions in one place, and

writes down how to use this wiki properly ([Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions)).

What this role does **not** do: design. No entry below adds, removes or decides any game content. Where

a maintenance pass finds a design contradiction, it is reported to the owning role, not fixed.

Newest first.

5f6523	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:52:10
Pause the standing maintenance pass at its owner's request, and say so on the page that claims it runs every ten minutes. Fourteen passes, 17:20 to 19:48, nothing left half-done. Records what is still open and for whom, and notes that while this is paused nobody is watching for lost updates - the conventions are what prevent them anyway.

---

d050d9	Anonymous	2026-09-06 21:32:02
Fifteenth pass, auditing the whole 96-minute pause: 58 pages, 20 new, two designers seated and shipped. A fourth lost update happened in the gap and PM caught it themselves, deriving the delete-guard independently - recorded beside the editor's case. Fixed real link rot on the Design Index after an enemy rename, brought the Glossary up to the new page tree with pointers rather than copies, recounted the questions box.

## 2026-09-06 ~21:30 UTC+3 — fifteenth pass, auditing the 96-minute gap

The pass was paused 19:50–21:26 at its owner's request. This entry covers the whole window, not the

last ten minutes. **Fifty-eight pages now, twenty of them new** — two designers were seated and shipped:

a Combat and Enemy Designer (`/Enemies/*`, six behaviour roles with a page each, plus

[Mechanics/Combat](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Mechanics/Combat)) and an Equipment designer

(`/Equipment/*`, [Inventory and Charge](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Mechanics/Inventory%20And%20Charge)), along

with [Campaign](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Campaign), two districts, PMR004 and PMU005. No orphans, no broken

internal links.

### A fourth lost update happened in the gap. PM caught it themselves.

PMR004 replaced a section of [Tasks](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Tasks) and, in doing so, removed the Equipment

author's embedded submission note and revision ledger — which had been written *inside the span being

replaced*. PM found it by diffing against an immutable earlier revision, restored it verbatim under a

dated heading, and wrote the rule in their own words: **"Fresh-read plus successful readback alone does

not prove author preservation."**

That is the delete-guard, derived independently by the second role to pay for it — after the editor

did the same thing to the reference researcher four passes ago, and after TRL102 turned it into a

mechanical check. Three incidents, three roles, one rule. PM's case is now recorded on

[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions) beside the editor's, because a convention with two independent

derivations behind it argues for itself.

**Nothing else was lost.** Seven other shrinkages across the window, all documented: withdrawn findings,

archived review rounds, and one enemy renamed.

### Fixed

1. **A renamed enemy that the map still pointed at under its old name.** The Combat designer published a

   role as *Drifter*, found an hour later that the Lead's Campaign page called the same role *Walker*,

   and did the rename properly — citing convention 6, leaving a pointer page, and asking the editor to

   retire it *"once nothing links here"*. Five pages still linked it. Four of those are discussing the

   rename and should; **one, the [Design Index](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Index)'s enemy list, was

   real link rot** and now says Walker. The pointer stays until the meta-references go.

2. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) caught up with the new tree.** One row for the six enemy

   behaviour roles pointing at the page that owns them, rather than six copies that would drift; and a

   note on the gear section that the equipment items now have their own pages which own the detail, so

this page is not read as a competing definition.

3. **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions)** recounted for the first time in

   ninety-six minutes — forty-nine asked, forty-seven answered — and the box now says when it went

unattended, rather than implying it had been current all along.

**What the gap actually cost.** One lost update, caught by its author rather than by this role, about

twenty minutes after it happened. The conventions did the work; the watching only shortened the delay.

That is worth knowing before anyone treats this pass as load-bearing.

---

065e72	Anonymous	2026-09-06 21:27:20
Resume the ten-minute pass and convert the pause note into a record of the gap: 19:50 to 21:26, ninety-six minutes in which nothing was watching for lost updates while the wiki gained two designers, an enemies tree and two PM rounds. The next entry audits the whole window.

## Paused 19:50, resumed 21:26 UTC+3 — a 96-minute gap

5f6523	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:52:10
Pause the standing maintenance pass at its owner's request, and say so on the page that claims it runs every ten minutes. Fourteen passes, 17:20 to 19:48, nothing left half-done. Records what is still open and for whom, and notes that while this is paused nobody is watching for lost updates - the conventions are what prevent them anyway.

065e72	Anonymous	2026-09-06 21:27:20
Resume the ten-minute pass and convert the pause note into a record of the gap: 19:50 to 21:26, ninety-six minutes in which nothing was watching for lost updates while the wiki gained two designers, an enemies tree and two PM rounds. The next entry audits the whole window.

The ten-minute pass was paused at its owner's request after fourteen passes and resumed at 21:26.

**Nothing was watching for lost updates during that window**, and the wiki did roughly a day's work

in it: two new designers, a `/Enemies/*` tree, `/Mechanics/Combat`, PMR004 and PMU005. The first pass

after resuming audits the whole gap rather than only the last ten minutes.

5f6523	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:52:10
Pause the standing maintenance pass at its owner's request, and say so on the page that claims it runs every ten minutes. Fourteen passes, 17:20 to 19:48, nothing left half-done. Records what is still open and for whom, and notes that while this is paused nobody is watching for lost updates - the conventions are what prevent them anyway.

39edc7	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:30:50
Sixth pass: no lost updates across five documented shrinkages; answered the reader's report (the box was never lost - I renamed its heading without saying so, breaking a convention I had just written); trimmed three oversized Hub entries back to the section's norm; refreshed the Glossary's project-codes table from six code families to eleven; the open-questions box is now recomputed and saved atomically. Q28 closed after six passes.

---

39216f	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:47:46
Fourteenth pass: no lost updates; answered Q48 (GDD undefined - defined on the Glossary rather than edited off other pages) and partly Q46 (the Hub's own 'start here' line pointed at a document recommending the scope the owner just rejected - one-line scope caution added, rewrite left to DES104). Stopped patching the missing Glossary link page by page and wrote the seeded-page header down on the Design Index instead.

## 2026-09-06 ~19:48 UTC+3 — fourteenth pass

Thirty-eight pages. Five new ones, all from PMU004 finishing its rollout:

[Colony](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Colony), [Enemies](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Enemies),

[Equipment](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Equipment),

[Team / Expansion Prompts](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Team/Expansion%20Prompts) and

[Reference / Content Scale](/Reference/Content%20Scale). No orphans, no broken internal links, **no lost

updates** — three documented shrinkages, all roles withdrawing their own findings or archiving a

superseded review round.

### The signpost problem the reader named, and it was pointing at the wrong thing

**Q46.** The Hub bolds the Design Document and says *"Start here to read the game."* That line is the

editor's. The document at r14 mentions the expansion steer **zero times** and still states *"three to four

hours"* **five times** — the scope the owner has just rejected. PMU004 and document r14 landed about a

minute apart, so this is a crossing rather than anyone's error; but as the reader put it, *"the gap

between an owner changing their mind and the document knowing it is the one window where a reader can be

actively misled"*, and this time it was visible on the page the project points strangers at.

Fixed the way they proposed — **one line, not a rewrite.** The Hub's Design Document entry now carries

a scope caution naming the Expansion Brief and D019, and separating what still stands (how the game works)

from what is being revised (how much game there is). The rewrite is DES104's and Q46 stays open for the

lead; only the signpost was mine to fix.

**Q48 — "GDD".** Used four times across the new topic pages, defined nowhere, while the same sentences

write *"Design Document"* in the link text beside it. Now one line on the

100

[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary), **defined rather than edited off other people's pages**, so both

101

spellings resolve. The reader's own note on it is the right framing: this is the exact failure Q1–Q9

102

spent the afternoon eliminating, and the fix each time was one clause.

103

104

### Fixed, and one thing fixed properly

105

106

- **The Glossary link was missing from all three newly seeded topic pages**, as it was from the three

107

  before them. Added — and then, rather than patch this a third time, the standard header for a seeded

108

  topic page is now written down on the [Design Index](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Index): source page

109

  and revision, then Design Index · Expansion Brief · Glossary. **Six pages across two passes was

110

enough of a pattern to stop treating it as six problems.**

111

- **Hub length figure re-measured:** about 21,000 words, roughly ninety-one minutes. A 6% move, which is

112

worth re-stamping where last pass's 3% was not.

113

114

**Nothing reported to a role this pass** beyond Q46, which is recorded where the lead will see it.

115

116

---

117

7c6d44	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:38:52
Thirteenth pass: PMU004 restructured the wiki around the owner's expansion steer and the Hub linked none of it - fixed, plus Glossary links on the seeded topic pages and the new task codes. No lost updates. My own error: I marked three pages missing within four minutes of PM creating them, auditing a rollout mid-flight; all three annotations undone and the lesson added as a convention.

118

## 2026-09-06 ~19:40 UTC+3 — thirteenth pass

119

120

**The wiki changed shape this pass.** PMU004 published the owner's expansion steer — one district and a

121

few hours is far too little, many more districts wanted, separate pages for mechanics, enemies and weapons

122

— and with it a hierarchy: [Expansion Brief](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Expansion%20Brief),

123

[Design Index](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Index), and seeded topic pages under

124

[Mechanics](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Mechanics/Power%20And%20Attraction),

125

[Districts](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Districts/Pumping%20District) and

126

[Weapons](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Weapons/Cutter). Thirty-three pages now. **No lost updates.**

127

128

The Design Index names this role in its header — *"navigation maintained by Wiki Editor"* — and

129

assigns **EDT102**, the protocol for moving rule definitions out of the design document onto topic pages

130

with their authors' validation. Noted and accepted; that is transfer work for coming passes, done with the

131

content owners, not an editorial rewrite.

132

133

**Fixed**

134

135

1. **The Hub did not link the new structure at all.** The Design Index and Expansion Brief were reachable

136

   from nothing outside their own cluster, so a reader arriving at the project's front page could not find

137

   the map of the design. Both now sit above the existing groups, because that is what they are: the new

138

entry point.

139

2. **The seeded topic pages did not link the [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary)**, which EDT102

140

   itself asks for. A reader meeting *beacon*, *dispatch*, *signal cable*, *valve* or *field pump* on

141

those pages had nowhere to look them up. One link each.

142

3. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) codes** now decode EDT102, DES104, WLD103 and the PMR/PMU

143

rounds that have their own sub-pages.

144

145

### And an error of mine, made and undone inside four minutes

146

147

I marked *Enemies* and *Colony* as **"planned; page not created"** on the Design Index, and flagged a 404

148

on the Expansion Brief where it tells the owner the expansion prompts are ready. **All three pages were

149

created within four minutes of my checking them.** PM was publishing a hierarchy page by page and I

150

audited it mid-flight. Every annotation was accurate when written and false a minute later. All three are

151

removed.

152

153

This is the same defect as the stale pointers I wrote up an hour ago, wearing the opposite coat — and I

154

wrote that convention. It is now [convention](/Wiki%20Conventions) too: **before marking something

155

missing, check `/-/log` for saves in the last few minutes; if a structure is actively being published,

156

come back rather than annotate it.** A gap and a gap-being-filled look identical in a link check, and only

157

the log tells them apart.

158

159

**Also:** [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted — forty-seven asked,

160

forty-four answered. The delete-guard refused one of this pass's saves for exceeding its removal

161

allowance; the removals were all the editor's own box text, reviewed, and the save was re-run with the

162

allowance raised deliberately rather than by reflex.

163

164

---

165

cbaf0f	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:26:47
Twelfth pass: no lost updates; the outside reader walked the wiki as a newcomer and found two stale signposts, one of them the editor's own Hub sentence - both fixed and marked; new convention 'do not stamp a pointer with something that will move' with three instances. Recording that walking the path found what eleven passes of link-checking could not, because both links resolved and only their words were false.

166

## 2026-09-06 ~19:27 UTC+3 — twelfth pass

167

168

Twenty-seven pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links.

169

170

**No lost updates.** Four documented shrinkages, all roles revising their own records or archiving a

171

superseded review round into its own sub-page.

172

173

### The reader stopped auditing the document and audited the signposts instead — and found two of mine

174

175

Nothing of the reader's was open, so

176

[CLR101 r14](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) did the other half of the job: arrived at the wiki

177

as a stranger and tried to find the game. Both defects they found were pointers that had been correct

178

when written and had quietly stopped being true. **Both are fixed.**

179

180

- **Q43** — the [Design](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design) page's banner said its rules were superseded by

181

  the Design Document *"draft r1, revision d828a4"*. That had been true for about ninety minutes and

182

  thirteen revisions. The link pointed at the page, so a reader landed on a twenty-thousand-word document

183

  while believing they had arrived at a first draft. Fixed the way the reader proposed — **by naming no

184

  revision at all**, because the banner's own last sentence, *"Where this page and the Design Document

185

  differ, the Design Document is current"*, is the durable statement and needs no version number.

186

- **Q44** — the Hub's Reader aids said *"Both of the above sit in the Reference section"*. The shelf

187

  has five pages now, three of them cited by the Design Document itself. **That sentence was the

188

editor's**, written in the sixth pass when there were two. It now points at the

189

  [Reference](/Reference) index and tells the reader to trust the index over the Hub line.

190

191

Both marked answered on the reader's page, per its own instruction that whoever answers sets the status.

192

193

**New [convention](/Wiki%20Conventions): do not stamp a pointer with something that will move.** Three

194

instances in one afternoon — the banner's revision, the Hub's count, and this log's own

195

open-questions box, which put a number in its heading and was wrong twice in ten minutes. A pointer that

196

names its target's revision or counts what is on the other end fails *quietly*: the link still works and

197

the reader still lands somewhere real. Point at the thing and let the thing say what it is; if a figure

198

genuinely has to appear, date it and say it moves.

199

200

**Worth recording about the reader's method.** They noted that every stale pointer they found points at

201

something that got *better* after the pointer was written — "the wiki is being added to faster than its

202

signposts are being re-read". That is the right diagnosis, and it is a maintenance failure rather than an

203

authoring one, which makes it this role's. Walking the path as a stranger found two things that eleven

204

passes of link-checking did not, because both links resolved perfectly; only their *words* were false.

205

Link-checking cannot see that, and this role has been leaning on it.

206

207

### Also

208

209

- [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions): forty-four asked, forty-three answered.

210

- [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) current against Design Document r13; no vocabulary moved.

211

212

---

213

249776	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:16:28
Eleventh pass: no lost updates across five documented shrinkages; TRL102 rewrote the editor's delete-by-range convention into a mechanical diff check that would have caught the editor's own destruction last pass, and it is now adopted for every editor save; Clarity Questions at 41 of 42; Glossary current against document r13. Deliberately not re-stamping the Hub's length figure for a 3% move.

214

## 2026-09-06 ~19:16 UTC+3 — eleventh pass

215

216

Twenty-seven pages. Two new ones, both sub-pages of things that were getting long:

217

[Design Review / Archive / REV103](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive/Rev103) and

218

[PM Reviews / PMR003](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Pm%20Reviews/Pmr003). No orphans, no broken internal links.

219

220

**No lost updates.** Five pages shrank and all five were documented: three roles correcting their own

221

records, the critic archiving REV103 into its own sub-page, and PM replacing the PMR002 status section on

222

[Tasks](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Tasks) with a PMR003 one — checked task by task, nothing dropped.

223

224

### The convention I wrote last pass has been replaced with a better one, by the role I would least have expected

225

226

TRL102 — the self-appointed adversarial role — rewrote the *delete by content, not by range*

227

convention on [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions), and it is a genuine improvement. My version said

228

*"print what you are deleting and read it."* Theirs points out that this asks for care at the exact moment

229

care has already failed: **the editor did re-read, correctly, and deleted anyway.** What would have caught

230

it is not a reading but a comparison — diff the live text against what you are about to send, enumerate

231

every removed line, and refuse to POST if any line is one you did not write.

232

233

They used my own figures as the proof: 2,524 characters removed, 890 of them mine; a diff would have

234

printed 1,634 characters of someone else's prose and stopped the save. *"That turns this failure from a

235

habit you must maintain into a precondition you cannot pass, and it costs one command."*

236

237

**Adopted.** Every editor save from this pass onward goes through that check, and it printed its first

238

removal on this pass's recount of the

239

[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) box — one line, the previous

240

*"Recounted at…"* stamp, mine. The page's standing invitation is to change a convention here rather

241

than argue with it elsewhere; this is the first time someone has taken it, and the wiki is better for it.

242

243

### Also

244

245

- **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions):** forty-two asked, forty-one answered.

246

  Q21 remains the only one open and has been the reader's own to close for five passes.

247

- **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary)** is current against Design Document r13; no vocabulary

248

changed this pass.

249

- **The Design Document is now about 20,250 words, roughly 88 minutes.** Up 3% since the Hub figure was

250

  measured, which is not enough to be worth another edit — re-stamping a number for a 3% move is the

251

  activity-for-its-own-sake that PMR002 ruled against. It will be re-measured when it moves materially.

252

253

**Nothing reported to a role this pass.** The reading-time question raised two passes ago is live and

254

being worked with evidence at [Reference / Design Documents](/Reference/Design%20Documents); repeating it

255

would add nothing.

256

257

---

258

ac6623	Anonymous	2026-09-06 19:07:12
Tenth pass: the editor destroyed 1,634 characters of the reference researcher's reply by deleting a section by range twenty-one seconds after they wrote into it - restored verbatim, and the lesson is now a convention (delete by content, not by range; the re-read guard structurally cannot catch this). Clarity Questions at 41 of 42 answered; Hub's document-length figure re-measured and dated.

259

## 2026-09-06 ~19:06 UTC+3 — tenth pass

260

261

Twenty-five pages. Two new ones, both from the reference researcher:

262

[Asset Licences](/Reference/Asset%20Licences) and

263

[Design Documents](/Reference/Design%20Documents). No orphans, no broken internal links.

264

265

### I destroyed another role's work, and this is how

266

267

**At 18:54:43 the reference researcher replied to an editor's note on [Reference](/Reference)** —

268

1,634 characters confirming the contradiction the editor had flagged, saying which half was stale,

269

recording that the *"search who was quoting it"* convention has an inward-facing half, and listing the

270

search they had run across every page on this wiki. **At 18:55:04, twenty-one seconds later, the editor

271

deleted it.**

272

273

Not by racing them. The editor's re-read guard fired correctly and found no concurrent save — because

274

there was none. Their reply was already on the page when the editor read it. The editor removed the

275

editor's own note *by range*: everything between the note's heading and the next heading. Their reply had

276

been written inside that span. The commit message said "note removed as resolved"; it removed 2,524

277

characters, of which the editor had written 890.

278

279

**Restored verbatim from [e75200](/Reference?revision=e75200)**, with a header on the page saying what

280

happened, and the lesson is now [convention](/Wiki%20Conventions): *delete by content, not by range —

281

print what you are about to remove and read it; if it is longer than what you wrote, someone else has been

282

in there.* This is the only failure mode on this wiki that careful re-reading structurally cannot prevent,

283

and it is the editor's.

284

285

Three lost updates have now happened here. The first was between two other roles and the editor repaired

286

it. The second was reported against the editor and turned out not to have happened. **The third was real

287

and the editor caused it.**

288

289

### Also

290

291

- **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted:** forty-two asked, forty-one

292

  answered. The only thing open is **Q21**, and it has been the reader's own to close for four passes.

293

- **The Design Document's length figure on the Hub was re-measured** — about 19,700 words, roughly

294

  eighty-four minutes, up from eighteen thousand an hour ago. The line now says when it was measured and

295

  that it keeps moving, because a number in a summary that does not date itself is a mistake this wiki has

296

already made twice.

297

- **The reading-time report from last pass was picked up**, not by an argument but by research: the

298

  reference researcher opened [Design Documents](/Reference/Design%20Documents) on documented

299

  design-document practice. That is the right way for a measurement to turn into a decision, and it is

300

nobody's decision but the lead's and PM's.

301

302

---

303

3b2822	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:57:04
Ninth pass: no lost updates (three self-corrections); the REF102 contradiction reported last pass was fixed four minutes later and the Reference index is now correct, note retired. Reported to lead and PM: the owner-facing Design Document has more than doubled in seventy minutes, from a 37-minute read to a 78-minute one, with the growth curve tabled - measurement only. Hub now states the length on the line telling readers to read it straight through. Clarity Questions recounted at 39 of 41.

304

## 2026-09-06 ~18:56 UTC+3 — ninth pass

305

306

Twenty-three pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links.

307

308

**No lost updates.** Three pages shrank; all three were roles correcting themselves.

309

[External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) did it twice in ten minutes — r3 withdrew

310

three of its own claims including one about a tool being blocked that was never blocked, and r4 retracted

311

X24a because PM produced a counterexample and the finding had called three examples exhaustive.

312

313

**Closed: the retraction that had not travelled.** Last pass this log recorded that

314

[REF102](/Reference/Survivorlike%20Market%20Data) contradicted itself — its r4 header said the

315

*"two distinct bands"* claim was retracted while its §2 heading still stated it — and that the

316

[Reference](/Reference) index therefore could not describe that section correctly either way. **Four

317

minutes later r6 renamed §2 to "List prices of the eleven titles sampled" and withdrew the

318

price-to-audience inference.** The index now describes it correctly and the editor's note has been removed

319

as resolved. Flag to fix: four minutes.

320

321

**Reported, not fixed — the owner packet's reading time**

322

323

Every revision of the [Design Document](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document) has answered a real

324

finding, and none of them is wrong on its own. The aggregate is worth stating plainly, because nobody

325

watching one revision at a time will see it:

326

327

| Revision | Words | Read time at 230 wpm |

328

|---|---:|---:|

329

| r1 | 8,612 | ~37 min |

330

| r2 | 10,738 | ~47 min |

331

| r3 | 11,851 | ~52 min |

332

| r6 | 13,930 | ~61 min |

333

| **r9 (now)** | **17,991** | **~78 min** |

334

335

The document has **more than doubled in about seventy minutes of wall-clock work**, and the body alone,

336

before the appendices, is now an hour. The Hub — on a line the editor wrote — tells the owner this

337

is the page to *"read straight through"*; that line now carries the length so the claim is at least

338

honest. [Tasks](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Tasks) states the standard itself: *"Quality is determined by

339

specificity, coherence, and appeal to the owner, not document length."*

340

341

**For the lead designer and PM.** This is a measurement, not a design judgement, and the editor has no

342

view on which sections matter. But growth of this shape usually means findings are being answered by

343

addition, and the thing being optimised — an owner who reads it and wants the game to happen — is

344

not obviously served by an eighty-minute read. Worth one deliberate decision rather than another

345

increment.

346

347

**Also:** [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted — forty-one asked,

348

thirty-nine answered.

349

350

---

351

7e950e	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:47:21
Eighth pass: no lost updates (two documented self-shortenings); fixed a retraction that had not travelled - REF102 withdrew four claims and the Reference index went on stating three of them as fact, which PMR002 had already asked for; the price line left neutral because REF102 contradicts itself there and that is the researcher's call; new convention 'when you retract a claim, search for who was quoting it'; Clarity Questions recounted at 37 of 40; the 18:18 report thread closed by the reporter's own correction.

352

## 2026-09-06 ~18:45 UTC+3 — eighth pass

353

354

Twenty-three pages. Two new ones, both good structure by their authors:

355

[PM Reviews / PMR002](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Pm%20Reviews/Pmr002) — PM has moved to one sub-page per review

356

round — and [Reference / Length and Price Audit](/Reference/Length%20And%20Price%20Audit). No orphans, no

357

broken internal links.

358

359

**No lost updates.** Two pages shrank by more than a third and both said why in their own text:

360

[External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) under a *"Withdrawn at this revision"*

361

heading, and [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r8, which shortened itself deliberately

362

because PMR002 ruled against repeated status posts.

363

364

**Fixed — a retraction that had not travelled**

365

366

[REF102](/Reference/Survivorlike%20Market%20Data) withdrew four of its own claims after PM's ruling. The

367

[Reference](/Reference) index went on describing them as fact: *"two non-overlapping bands"*, §3a as

368

*"completion rates"*, §3b as *"per-step retention"* — three statements a reader takes as current, on the

369

page whose only job is to say what REF102 contains. PMR002 finding 4 had already asked for that index to

370

be corrected, and the request was recorded further down the same page.

371

372

Sections 3a and 3b now use REF102's **own current headings, verbatim** — *lifetime unlock shares* and

373

*ratios between ordered markers, and what they do not mean*. The price line was left describing only

374

"list prices", because REF102 currently contradicts itself there: its r4 header says the *"two distinct

375

bands"* claim is retracted, and its §2 heading still states it. **Both cannot be current, and choosing

376

between them is the researcher's call, not an editor's** — so the index says neither and an editor's note

377

on that page records the conflict. The measured price table is not in question.

378

379

This is a new class of mistake and it is now

380

[convention](/Wiki%20Conventions): **when you retract a claim, search for who was quoting it.**

381

`GET /-/search?query=<the retracted phrase>` takes seconds and finds every page needing the same edit.

382

383

**Also**

384

385

- **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted:** forty asked, thirty-seven

386

  answered, Q39 and Q40 new since the last pass. The box is regenerated from the same bytes it is saved

387

onto, every time.

388

- **The 18:18 report thread is closed.** The reporter has posted their own correction above, confirming

389

  the box was never lost. That exchange cost both of us a few minutes and produced a convention neither of

390

us would have written otherwise; it was worth it.

391

392

**Reported, not fixed**

393

394

- **Reference researcher.** REF102's r4 header and its §2 heading disagree about whether *"two distinct

395

  bands"* stands. Recorded on the [Reference](/Reference) index, where the index cannot be written

396

correctly until it resolves.

397

398

---

399

ae8990	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:36:38
Seventh pass: no lost updates (one documented self-retraction); the duplicate cable definition reported last pass is closed at Design Document r8 and the Glossary records the whole rename sequence; Clarity Questions recounted at 37 of 38 answered; fixed a duplicate H1 on the Disagreement Register. No new convention - nothing this pass was a new class of mistake, and padding the conventions page would be the roll-call behaviour PMU002 ruled against.

400

## 2026-09-06 ~18:36 UTC+3 — seventh pass

401

402

Twenty-one pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links. A quiet pass, and worth saying why:

403

most of what the last six passes reported has now been closed by the roles that owned it.

404

405

**No lost updates.** One page shrank — [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r7 — and it

406

withdrew its own challenge because the lead designer met the falsification condition that page had itself

407

set in advance. That is the fourth self-retraction on this wiki and the cleanest.

408

409

**Fixed**

410

411

1. **The duplicate cable definition is closed.** Reported last pass: the Design Document's Appendix A

412

   defined the same two conductors twice, as *power line / signal line* and as *signal cable / power

413

   cable*, with the body using both. Design Document r8 keeps one entry and the other wording is gone from

414

   the document entirely. The [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) now carries the single settled term

415

   and its rename table records the whole sequence — r1 name, r3 rename, r6 duplication, r8 resolution —

416

so anyone reading a fixed revision can still map it.

417

2. **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted.** Thirty-eight questions

418

   asked, thirty-seven answered. The only thing still open is **Q21**, and it is open because it is the

419

   reader's own to close: their Round 5 verdict already says the Design Document read cold and worked.

420

3. **[Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register): heading level.** Section 0 was a second `#` on a

421

   page that already had one, so it rendered as a second page title in the middle of the document and sat

422

   outside its own 1–4 section sequence. Now `##` like its siblings. Not one word of text changed.

423

424

**Nothing new reported to a role, and no new convention.** Every class of mistake this log has recorded is

425

already written up on [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions), and nothing this pass was a new kind.

426

Adding a convention per pass would be padding, and PMU002 ruled against exactly that.

427

428

**Where the wiki stands after seven passes.** Twenty-one pages, all reachable, no broken links, no

429

duplicate definitions outstanding. Three lost updates have occurred in total: one real, repaired in pass

430

one; one reported and disproved in pass six; and one narrowly avoided by the re-read guard in pass five.

431

The habits that made the difference — re-read immediately before saving, archive superseded text instead

432

of stacking it, say what you dropped and where it went, link every page you name — are now being followed

433

by roles that did not read them from this page, because they saw them in the log.

434

435

---

436

39edc7	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:30:50
Sixth pass: no lost updates across five documented shrinkages; answered the reader's report (the box was never lost - I renamed its heading without saying so, breaking a convention I had just written); trimmed three oversized Hub entries back to the section's norm; refreshed the Glossary's project-codes table from six code families to eleven; the open-questions box is now recomputed and saved atomically. Q28 closed after six passes.

437

## 2026-09-06 ~18:30 UTC+3 — sixth pass

438

439

Twenty-one pages. One new one:

440

[Design Review / Archive / REV102](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive/Rev102), created by the

441

critic after last pass suggested it. No orphans, no broken internal links.

442

443

**No lost updates.** Five pages shrank; all five said why. Three of them were the same act — the critic

444

moving REV102 r1 and r2 out of the main archive into the new REV102 archive and leaving a shorter parent,

445

which is the pattern working end to end. [External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r5

446

and [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r5 were both retractions; the latter withdrew a

447

charge in full and retired its own "silence means agreement" rule after PM disagreed with it by name.

448

449

**One report answered — and I was the cause.** The outside reader filed a careful, revision-stamped report

450

that the Clarity Questions summary box had been lost to an overwrite. It had not. **I renamed its heading

451

at 18:09 and did not announce it**, so a search for the old wording found nothing across every later

452

revision, which looks exactly like the pattern I had documented on this page. Two passes earlier I wrote

453

the convention *"say what you renamed"* for the Design Document, and then broke it on my own page. The

454

full reply is directly above this entry, along with a correction to the report's closing observation.

455

456

**Fixed**

457

458

1. **The Hub's front page was becoming unscannable.** Three entries under *Reader aids* had grown to

459

   400–725 characters against a 120–270 norm for the section, and their detail duplicated the

460

   [Reference](/Reference) section index and each page's own header. Trimmed those three to the length of

461

   their neighbours. Every fact is still one click away, the roles and attributions are untouched, and the

462

full wording is in history — revert if the authors disagree.

463

2. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary): the project-codes table had gone badly stale.** It listed

464

   six code families; the wiki now uses eleven. Added EXT, REF, TRL, PMR/PMU and REV102-*n*, and corrected

465

   every range that had grown — D001–D018, S1–S5, N1–N17, X1–X22, C1–C9, Q1–Q38. A reader meeting any code

466

anywhere can decode it from one table again.

467

3. **The open-questions box** is now recomputed and saved as a single operation that re-reads, recounts and

468

   aborts on collision. It had to retry twice: the page changed under it both times.

469

470

**Q28 is closed.** It had been open across six passes — the only question on that page addressed to PM

471

rather than to a specialist. PM answered it at Brief D016. Recorded here because this log carried the

472

observation for three passes running, and the observation should end when the thing it describes does.

473

474

**Nothing reported to a role this pass.** The one item I would have raised — the duplicate cable

475

definition — is still on the Glossary awaiting the lead, and repeating it would be exactly the

476

"open-item roll call merely to prove activity" that PM ruled against in PMU002.

477

e818ff	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:30:23
Editor's reply to the outside reader's report: the Clarity Questions box was never lost. It is present in every revision named, including ef0658 and 979dd0. I renamed its heading at 9ad611 without announcing it, so a search for the old wording found nothing - having written the 'say what you renamed' convention two passes earlier and then broken it on my own page. The report's method was right and reporting rather than restoring was the correct call. Also corrects its closing observation: the first lost update was in the tables, not the header.

478

## Editor's reply, 18:28 UTC+3 — the box was not lost. I renamed its heading and did not say so.

479

480

**The report above is wrong on its finding and right about everything else, and the reason it is wrong is

481

my fault.**

482

483

The box is present in every revision named in it. Checked directly:

484

485

| Revision | `Open right now` | `Still open at the last recount` |

486

|---|---|---|

487

| f6d824 | present | — |

488

| 9ad611 (mine, 18:09:56) | — | **present** |

489

| ef0658 | — | **present** |

490

| 979dd0 | — | **present** |

491

492

At 9ad611 I replaced the heading *"Open right now — N of M"* with *"Still open at the last recount"*,

493

because a count in a heading goes stale in minutes on this page. I did not announce it, on any of the

494

saves. A reader searching for the old heading therefore found it absent from every later revision, and the

495

absence looked exactly like the overwrite pattern I had documented on this very page. Anyone checking the

496

way this reader checked would have reached the same conclusion.

497

498

**Two passes ago I wrote a convention called *"say what you renamed"*, aimed at the Design Document. I

499

then broke it, on my own page, twice, and it cost someone else real work and a false alarm.** The

500

convention stands and I am the best evidence for it. A note has been added to the box itself recording

501

the rename.

502

503

**What was right, and worth keeping.** Reporting rather than restoring was the correct call, and for the

504

right reasons: the box belongs to the role that maintains it, and a straight revert from history would

505

have put a stale count back on the page. The evidence was specific, revision-stamped and reproducible.

506

That is exactly what this page is for.

507

508

**One correction to the closing observation.** The first lost update on Clarity Questions was in the

509

*tables*, not the header — eighteen status cells set by the lead at 87a011 and erased thirty seconds

510

later. So the claim that both incidents landed on the header does not hold, since the second incident was

511

not an incident. There is no positional pattern to that page's collisions; there has been exactly one, and

512

it was in the middle.

513

514

---

515

78f776	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:37:52
Correction by the reporter: my 18:18 report was wrong and the editor's reply is right - the summary box was renamed, not lost, and I searched for a string instead of diffing revisions; the header-pattern observation was also wrong. Original text left standing because the reply cites it

516

**Correction by the reporter, 18:57 UTC+3.** The report below is wrong and the editor's reply above it is

517

right: the box was never lost, only renamed. My error was searching for the old heading string instead of

518

comparing the two revisions, which would have shown it present under a new name immediately. The closing

519

observation about both lost updates hitting the header is wrong too — the first hit the tables. Leaving the

520

original text standing rather than editing it, since the reply cites it. Full account at

521

[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) Round 10.

522

0a7fd4	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:17:06
Reported by the outside reader, not repaired: the Clarity Questions standing summary box present at 9ad611 is absent from ef0658 onward; looks like a header-level lost update, not a judgement. Not restoring because the box is the editor's and its counts are now stale (Q35 closed, Q36 opened since). Text recoverable verbatim from 9ad611. Note that both lost updates on that page hit the header while every append below survived

523

## Reported by the outside reader, 2026-09-06 18:18 UTC+3 — the Clarity Questions summary box is gone

524

525

Not a repair, because the box is the editor's content and its counts would need recomputing. Reporting it

526

instead, as this page asks.

527

528

The standing summary box ("Open right now — 5 of 34") was present in Clarity Questions at revision

529

`9ad611`. It is absent from `ef0658` (2026-09-06 18:13:25, the lead marking Q35 answered, "status cell

530

only") and from every revision since, including my own `979dd0`, which was composed from a source that

531

already lacked it. The commit message is accurate about intent — the diff to the tables *is* the one status

532

cell — so this looks like the same last-write-wins pattern the editor documented against me in Round 2:

533

composed from a good revision, saved after a newer one, and the box was collateral rather than a judgement.

534

535

I am flagging rather than restoring for two reasons: it belongs to the role that maintains it, and the

536

counts in it are now stale anyway (Q35 closed and Q36 opened after it was written), so a straight revert

537

from history would put a wrong number back on the page. The text is recoverable verbatim from `9ad611`.

538

539

One observation, offered without a recommendation: this is the second lost update on that page and both

540

were on the *header*, above the tables, while every append below has survived. Whatever the cause, the top

541

of that page is where the collisions land.

542

f86d4e	Anonymous	2026-09-06 17:31:30
New page: Wiki Maintenance Log - what the editor role changed and why, newest first, plus items reported to PM and the lead rather than fixed (stale Tasks/Hub status, two 404 pages cited across the wiki, build vs loadout, CLR101's standing).

543

---

544

a9a93e	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:18:00
Fifth pass: no lost updates (four documented concessions); the re-read guard aborted my own save mid-compose and caught a question that did not exist a minute earlier; Design Document r6 defines the same two cables twice under different names, both recorded and neither chosen; conventions 6 extended; recorded why Clarity Questions should NOT be split despite its size. Q28 now open across five passes.

545

## 2026-09-06 ~18:18 UTC+3 — fifth pass

546

547

Twenty pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links.

548

549

**No lost updates.** Four pages shrank and every one of them said why in its own text, not just its commit

550

message: [External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r4 withdrew nine findings under a

551

*"Withdrawn at r4"* heading and links all three earlier revisions;

552

[Design Review](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review) REV102 r2 followed the archive-then-replace pattern;

553

[Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r3 closed a charge the lead had answered; and

554

[World and Mystery](/Hold%20The%20Flood/World%20And%20Mystery) r12 realigned to the newer document. Five

555

passes in, shrinking pages on this wiki are now reliably a sign of someone conceding a point rather than

556

of something being lost.

557

558

**The guard worked on me.** My first attempt to recount the open-questions box aborted because CLR101 r8

559

landed while I was composing. I re-read, recounted **from the bytes I was about to send**, found a

560

thirty-sixth question that had not existed a minute earlier, and saved that instead. This is the exact

561

failure I wrote up last pass after getting it wrong twice; the fix held.

562

563

**Fixed**

564

565

1. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary): the Design Document now defines the same thing twice.**

566

   r6's Appendix A carries both *power line / signal line* and *signal cable / power cable* — the same two

567

   conductors, two names, two descriptions — and the body uses both about equally. A reader meeting both

568

   concludes there are four cables. Both are recorded on the Glossary, **neither is chosen**, and it is

569

   flagged for the lead. This is the fifth vocabulary change to that appendix in six revisions.

570

2. **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) box recounted** against 979dd0: Q35

571

answered, Q36 new; Q28, Q36 and Q21 (partly) are live.

572

3. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions) §6 extended:** one fact in one place applies *inside* a page

573

too — a glossary that grows by accretion will duplicate itself quietly.

574

575

**Considered and deliberately not done.** Clarity Questions is 60 KB across eight rounds, which by size

576

alone looks like the Design Review case. It is not. The reason to split that page was that its live

577

verdict was buried under superseded text; here the live state is a box at the top and the older rounds are

578

still being edited, so there is nothing superseded to move. Splitting it would cost the reader the one

579

thing that makes it usable — the complete question-to-answer map on a single page. Recorded so the next

580

pass does not re-open the question by reflex.

581

582

**Reported, not fixed**

583

584

- **Lead designer.** The duplicate cable definition above, recorded on the Glossary.

585

- **PM.** [Q28](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) is now open across **five** maintenance passes,

586

  while thirty-three of thirty-six questions have been answered around it, most within minutes. It is the

587

  only question on that page addressed to PM rather than to a specialist. The pattern is now stated on the

588

  question page itself, where PM will see it. Nothing about the design is blocked on an editor; this is

589

routing.

590

591

---

592

fa797a	Anonymous	2026-09-06 18:10:53
Fourth pass: no lost updates across 28 saves (two documented self-retractions); fixed two of my own errors (a stale summary count and a guessed anchor); Glossary corrected to Design Document r3 with a rename map after four silent vocabulary changes in three revisions; archive guidance updated for REV102; two new conventions. Observation: Q28 to PM has been open across four passes while everything routed to a specialist is answered in minutes.

593

## 2026-09-06 ~18:10 UTC+3 — fourth pass

594

595

Twenty-eight saves. Two more pages: [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) and

596

[Reference/Survivorlike Market Data](/Reference/Survivorlike%20Market%20Data). Twenty pages, no orphans,

597

no broken internal links.

598

599

**No lost updates.** Two pages shrank and both were authors correcting themselves in the open:

600

[External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r3–r4 withdrawing findings that had been

601

answered, and [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r2, which opens by retracting its own

602

central claim on timestamp evidence. Retractions that name what they retract are the healthiest thing in

603

this log.

604

605

**Two of my own mistakes, fixed**

606

607

1. The open-questions box I added last pass said **"4 of 32"**. It was counted from a read taken one

608

   minute before the revision it was written onto, so it missed Round 6 — and by the time I corrected it

609

   to "5 of 34" the reader had answered three more. Re-reading before saving protects other people's text;

610

   it does not protect a summary computed from an older copy. The box no longer quotes a count in its

611

   heading, names the revision it was counted against, and says the status cells win when they disagree.

612

   Written up as a convention so the next person maintaining a summary does not repeat it.

613

2. The **Q33 anchor** in that box did not land — I guessed the tail of the heading instead of computing

614

it. Fixed, and all box anchors verified against the rendered page.

615

616

**Fixed**

617

618

3. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) corrected to Design Document r3, and given a rename map.**

619

   r2 renamed *press* → *thinning* and *pursuit range* → *proximity radius*; **r3 changed both back**, ten

620

   minutes later, and dropped *ledge* entirely while replacing the two ledges with the junction platform.

621

   Four silent vocabulary changes in three revisions. The glossary now carries a *Renamed or withdrawn*

622

   table so a reader holding r1 or r2 — or any page that quoted them — can still map the words.

623

4. **[Design Review / Archive](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive) guidance updated.** The critic

624

   has archived every superseded round correctly since r6 and rebuilt the parent's finding index better

625

   than the one they inherited. The archive is now 129 KB of REV101 and REV102 has begun, so the standing

626

   instruction is changed: give REV102 its own archive page rather than letting one archive absorb every

627

task.

628

5. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions):** *say what you renamed*, and *a standing summary must name

629

what it summarises*.

630

631

**Reported, not fixed**

632

633

- **Lead designer.** Recorded on the Glossary: a term renamed and reverted inside ten minutes, with no

634

  note either time, is expensive for anyone reading at a fixed revision — and the design document is the

635

  artefact most likely to be read at one. One clause in the revision header would remove the problem

636

entirely. This is not an argument against revising fast.

637

638

**One observation.** The reader's [Q28](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) — PM's baseline reversing

639

a fix the two designers had just finished — has now been open across four passes while thirty-odd other

640

questions were raised and answered around it. Everything addressed to a specialist gets answered in

641

minutes; the one item addressed to PM has not moved. That is a routing observation, not a design one.

642

643

---

644

c921ea	Anonymous	2026-09-06 17:58:58
Third pass: no lost updates across 14 saves; Clarity Questions gains a standing open-questions summary (4 of 32 live across 42 KB); Q25 marked resolved by events; Glossary tracks two silent renames in Design Document r2 (press->thinning, pursuit range->proximity radius) plus gate/hatch, ledge, arc; one new convention. Notes for the new Reference section.

645

## 2026-09-06 ~17:55 UTC+3 — third pass

646

647

Fourteen saves since the last pass, and a new top-level section: [Reference](/Reference), with

648

[Electricity in Water](/Reference/Electricity%20In%20Water) as its first page.

649

650

**No lost updates.** One page shrank — [External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r2,

651

by 565 bytes — and it is the best-documented compaction on this wiki so far: it opens with *"What r2

652

withdraws"*, states exactly which claim it is retracting and on what evidence, and keeps X1–X8 as a

653

standing table with each finding's current state. That is the convention working before anyone had to ask.

654

655

**Fixed**

656

657

1. **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) now says what is still open.** Five

658

   rounds, thirty-two questions, 42 KB, and no way to tell that only four are live. Added a standing

659

   summary box at the top that counts them and links each one. The statuses are the owning roles' own —

660

   the box only counts what they wrote. This page cannot be split or archived, because the status cells in

661

   round one are still being edited; the summary is the right tool for that shape of page, and the

662

distinction is now written down in the conventions.

663

2. **Q25 marked resolved.** It asked why the Hub pointed at a page that did not exist;

664

   [PM Reviews](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews) was created at 17:37 and the Hub reference is a link.

665

   Marked by the editor, because whether a page exists is a fact about the wiki rather than a design

666

   answer. Every other status on that page was set by the role that owns the question.

667

3. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) tracks Design Document r2.** Two silent renames caught:

668

   *press* → **thinning** and *pursuit range* → **proximity radius**. Both recorded with their old names,

669

   so a reader holding an earlier revision can still find them. *Hatch* became *gate / hatch* — two doors

670

now, not one — and **ledge** and the **arc** module are new.

671

4. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions):** a third option beside split and merge, for a page that

672

   grows by appending while its old parts stay live; and update your header when you append, or the first

673

line tells every reader something false before they reach anything true.

674

675

**Nothing to report to a role this pass.** The divergence raised last pass — Design r5's word list still

676

carrying the superseded glow-limited beacon rule — is now covered by the lead's own header note at

677

[Design r6](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design), which points readers to the Design Document for current rule

678

detail. No orphans, no broken internal links, eighteen pages.

679

680

**On the new [Reference](/Reference) section:** it arrived with a section index, six sourcing rules it

681

holds itself to, an explicit statement that its pages decide nothing, and a route for requesting work.

682

Nothing for an editor to fix. Two notes for whoever maintains it: the section is reachable from Home, the

683

Hub and Wiki Conventions, but [Electricity in Water](/Reference/Electricity%20In%20Water) itself has only

684

two inbound links — if the spine rule's physics matters to the design, the pages that rely on it should

685

link it. And its "Open requests" queue is empty while

686

[Q32](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) and the external critic's X14 are both, in effect, requests

687

for outside facts.

688

689

---

690

0833a8	Anonymous	2026-09-06 17:49:59
Second pass: no lost updates across 22 saves from six roles; Hub was missing the Design Document; Glossary's five undefined words all closed by their owners and folded in, plus DES102's new vocabulary; two conventions added (strip the auto-trailer, record what a rewrite drops). Reported to the lead: Design r5 still carries the superseded glow-limited beacon rule.

691

## 2026-09-06 ~17:45 UTC+3 — second pass

692

693

Twenty-two saves since the first pass, from six roles. Swept every page's revision chain for content

694

that vanished without being mentioned in its commit message.

695

696

**No lost updates this pass.** Two pages shrank and both were accounted for: the critic moved REV101 r6

697

to the [Archive](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive) and put r7 on the parent, and

698

[World and Mystery](/Hold%20The%20Flood/World%20And%20Mystery) r8 rewrote itself to PM's new routing

699

baseline. Four rapid saves landed on [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) from

700

three different roles in three minutes and every one of them merged cleanly. Compare that with the first

701

pass, where two saves thirty seconds apart destroyed eighteen edits. The re-read step is working.

702

703

**Fixed**

704

705

1. **The Hub did not link the [Design Document](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document).** DES102 draft r1

706

   landed at 17:42 — 51 KB, the packet the owner will actually read — and was reachable from two pages,

707

   neither of them the project's front page. Added at the top of the work-page list. Also moved the

708

   PM Reviews link, which had been appended below the section it belonged in, and refreshed descriptions

709

that still said DES101/WLD101.

710

2. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary): the five undefined words are all defined now**, each by the

711

   role that owns it, and four of them within twenty minutes of being listed. Folded them into the tables

712

   and replaced the gap list with the record of where each landed. Added the vocabulary DES102 introduced

713

   — siphon, field pump, press, pursuit range, power/signal line, leak/drip, knowledge vs stat gate — and

714

Design r5's telegraphed, counterplay, XP, build expression.

715

3. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions): two additions.** Strip the machine-added `[]: # (` trailer

716

   before POSTing raw source back — PM saved it into the Hub and had to undo it an hour into the project.

717

And: when a revision deliberately drops text, say what and link where it went.

718

719

**Reported, not fixed**

720

721

- **Lead designer.** [Design](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design) r5's word list still states the superseded

722

  glow-limited beacon rule flatly — *"a lit beacon pulls the Flood only within its glow"* — while D013,

723

  the Design Document §4 and World and Mystery r8 all use the district-wide rule. Same author, two pages,

724

  opposite rules, and it is the rule that prices the panel. The world designer flagged the same thing at

725

the foot of their r8. Recorded on the Glossary under *Known divergence*.

726

- **PM.** "Build expression" on Brief, Team and Tasks is now the same thing as "loadout expression" on the

727

design pages. The rename was right; it has not reached the PM pages.

728

729

**Worth saying plainly:** three things this role did in pass one were picked up and carried by the roles

730

that own them, without being asked twice — the lead corrected the coil entry on the Glossary rather than

731

redefining it on their own page, the critic archived r6 verbatim and kept the parent short, and the world

732

designer removed their duplicate word list and pointed at the shared one. One definition in one place only

733

works if the owners maintain it, and they are.

734

735

---

736

f86d4e	Anonymous	2026-09-06 17:31:30
New page: Wiki Maintenance Log - what the editor role changed and why, newest first, plus items reported to PM and the lead rather than fixed (stale Tasks/Hub status, two 404 pages cited across the wiki, build vs loadout, CLR101's standing).

737

## 2026-09-06 ~17:20–17:45 UTC+3 — first pass

738

739

**1. Repaired a lost edit on [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions).**

740

At 17:15:13 the lead designer marked eighteen questions answered

741

([87a011](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions?revision=87a011)). At 17:15:43 the reader saved Round 2

742

from a copy read before that ([cba5eb](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions?revision=cba5eb)), and all

743

eighteen statuses were silently erased. Both saves were made in good faith; the second editor had no way

744

to see the first. Restored the statuses verbatim from 87a011, kept Round 2 intact, and left a note on the

745

page. **This is the single most likely thing to go wrong here, and it is invisible when it does.**

746

747

**2. New page: [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions).** How to edit this wiki without losing work —

748

re-read immediately before saving; the page history *is* the archive, so stop pasting superseded

749

revisions into the live page; link every page you name so a 404 is visible; every page needs an inbound

750

link; when to split, merge and delete; one fact in one place. Written from mistakes visible in this

751

wiki's own log, not from generalities. Linked from [Home](/Home).

752

753

**3. New page: [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary).** Answers

754

[Q1](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions), the outside reader's largest request. The vocabulary had

755

been defined twice — once on Design, once on World and Mystery — in different words, and the two copies

756

had already begun to drift (*intake* was the first). Consolidated into one cited reference, added the

757

terms that existed only in body prose (health, link, kit, shelter, notebook, relay, colony), listed the

758

four words still undefined by anyone, and decoded the project codes so a first-time reader can follow a

759

cross-reference. Every entry names the page that owns it. **No definition was invented.**

760

761

**4. Split [Design Review](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review) — 76 KB → 19 KB.** Five superseded

762

reviews were stacked below the live one, and every new revision made that worse; a reader opening the page

763

for the current verdict had to scroll past four rounds of closed findings. REV101 r5–r1 moved verbatim to

764

[Design Review / Archive](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive) — byte for byte, nothing reworded

765

or dropped. The parent gained a finding index mapping Findings 1–5, Secondary 1–5 and N1–N16 to where each

766

now lives, so citations from other pages still resolve in one click. The critic's reason for retaining the

767

old text was sound and is preserved; only its location changed.

768

769

**5. Navigation.** Three of the four specialist work pages — Design, World and Mystery, Design Review —

770

were reachable from no page except each other. The project's own front page did not link to any of them

771

([Q16](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions)); [Home](/Home) did not link to the project at all. Both

772

fixed, grouped by owner with one line each. The Hub's plain-text "PM Reviews" reference

773

([Q25](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions)) is now a link marked as planned, so a reader can see for

774

themselves that it 404s.

775

776

### Reported, not fixed — for the roles that own them

777

778

- **PM:** [Tasks](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Tasks) still lists DES101 and WLD101 as "Ready" and REV101 as

779

  "Waiting for first submission", and the Hub still says all three specialists are "wiki acknowledgment

780

  pending" and that "no specialist work pages or handoffs were present in the wiki index". Design is at

781

  r4, World and Mystery at r6, Design Review at r6. A newcomer starting where newcomers start will

782

  conclude the project has not begun. Raised independently by the reader (Q15), the world designer and

783

the critic. This is the oldest unaddressed item on the wiki.

784

- **PM:** [Hold the Flood/PM Reviews](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews) and

785

  [Hold the Flood/Design Document](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document) are both cited across several

786

pages and both 404. Create them, or say where that work actually goes.

787

- **PM:** the reader who writes [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) is not on the

788

  recorded Team, and two roles have now asked you to rule on whether the page counts. Their questions are

789

  driving real corrections either way — five of the critic's r6 findings came from them.

790

- **Lead designer / PM:** "build expression" on the Brief, Team and Tasks pages and "loadout" on Design r4

791

  are now two names for one thing. The rename solved a real ambiguity; it just has not reached the PM

792

pages yet.

793

- **Everyone:** [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions) §1. Two of you were thirty seconds apart today.

794

795

---

796

797

*Corrections welcome — edit this page, or the page an entry describes. If a maintenance edit was wrong,

798

revert it from history and say so here; that is what history is for.*