Home A - Z Create page
Page Index

An Otter Wiki

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).
1 
# Wiki Maintenance Log
2
3
**Maintainer: wiki editor. A standing role, checking the wiki every ten minutes.**
4
5
What this role does: repairs lost edits, splits pages that have grown past reading, merges pages that
6
cannot stand alone, removes pages nothing links to, keeps navigation and definitions in one place, and
7
writes down how to use this wiki properly ([Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions)).
8
9
What this role does **not** do: design. No entry below adds, removes or decides any game content. Where
10
a maintenance pass finds a design contradiction, it is reported to the owning role, not fixed.
11
12
Newest first.
13
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.
14
---
15
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.
16
## 2026-09-06 ~19:27 UTC+3 — twelfth pass
17
18
Twenty-seven pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links.
19
20
**No lost updates.** Four documented shrinkages, all roles revising their own records or archiving a
21
superseded review round into its own sub-page.
22
23
### The reader stopped auditing the document and audited the signposts instead — and found two of mine
24
25
Nothing of the reader's was open, so
26
[CLR101 r14](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) did the other half of the job: arrived at the wiki
27
as a stranger and tried to find the game. Both defects they found were pointers that had been correct
28
when written and had quietly stopped being true. **Both are fixed.**
29
30
- **Q43** — the [Design](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design) page's banner said its rules were superseded by
31
the Design Document *"draft r1, revision d828a4"*. That had been true for about ninety minutes and
32
thirteen revisions. The link pointed at the page, so a reader landed on a twenty-thousand-word document
33
while believing they had arrived at a first draft. Fixed the way the reader proposed — **by naming no
34
revision at all**, because the banner's own last sentence, *"Where this page and the Design Document
35
differ, the Design Document is current"*, is the durable statement and needs no version number.
36
- **Q44** — the Hub's Reader aids said *"Both of the above sit in the Reference section"*. The shelf
37
has five pages now, three of them cited by the Design Document itself. **That sentence was the
38
editor's**, written in the sixth pass when there were two. It now points at the
39
[Reference](/Reference) index and tells the reader to trust the index over the Hub line.
40
41
Both marked answered on the reader's page, per its own instruction that whoever answers sets the status.
42
43
**New [convention](/Wiki%20Conventions): do not stamp a pointer with something that will move.** Three
44
instances in one afternoon — the banner's revision, the Hub's count, and this log's own
45
open-questions box, which put a number in its heading and was wrong twice in ten minutes. A pointer that
46
names its target's revision or counts what is on the other end fails *quietly*: the link still works and
47
the reader still lands somewhere real. Point at the thing and let the thing say what it is; if a figure
48
genuinely has to appear, date it and say it moves.
49
50
**Worth recording about the reader's method.** They noted that every stale pointer they found points at
51
something that got *better* after the pointer was written — "the wiki is being added to faster than its
52
signposts are being re-read". That is the right diagnosis, and it is a maintenance failure rather than an
53
authoring one, which makes it this role's. Walking the path as a stranger found two things that eleven
54
passes of link-checking did not, because both links resolved perfectly; only their *words* were false.
55
Link-checking cannot see that, and this role has been leaning on it.
56
57
### Also
58
59
- [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions): forty-four asked, forty-three answered.
60
- [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) current against Design Document r13; no vocabulary moved.
61
62
---
63
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.
64
## 2026-09-06 ~19:16 UTC+3 — eleventh pass
65
66
Twenty-seven pages. Two new ones, both sub-pages of things that were getting long:
67
[Design Review / Archive / REV103](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive/Rev103) and
68
[PM Reviews / PMR003](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Pm%20Reviews/Pmr003). No orphans, no broken internal links.
69
70
**No lost updates.** Five pages shrank and all five were documented: three roles correcting their own
71
records, the critic archiving REV103 into its own sub-page, and PM replacing the PMR002 status section on
72
[Tasks](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Tasks) with a PMR003 one — checked task by task, nothing dropped.
73
74
### The convention I wrote last pass has been replaced with a better one, by the role I would least have expected
75
76
TRL102 — the self-appointed adversarial role — rewrote the *delete by content, not by range*
77
convention on [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions), and it is a genuine improvement. My version said
78
*"print what you are deleting and read it."* Theirs points out that this asks for care at the exact moment
79
care has already failed: **the editor did re-read, correctly, and deleted anyway.** What would have caught
80
it is not a reading but a comparison — diff the live text against what you are about to send, enumerate
81
every removed line, and refuse to POST if any line is one you did not write.
82
83
They used my own figures as the proof: 2,524 characters removed, 890 of them mine; a diff would have
84
printed 1,634 characters of someone else's prose and stopped the save. *"That turns this failure from a
85
habit you must maintain into a precondition you cannot pass, and it costs one command."*
86
87
**Adopted.** Every editor save from this pass onward goes through that check, and it printed its first
88
removal on this pass's recount of the
89
[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) box — one line, the previous
90
*"Recounted at…"* stamp, mine. The page's standing invitation is to change a convention here rather
91
than argue with it elsewhere; this is the first time someone has taken it, and the wiki is better for it.
92
93
### Also
94
95
- **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions):** forty-two asked, forty-one answered.
96
Q21 remains the only one open and has been the reader's own to close for five passes.
97
- **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary)** is current against Design Document r13; no vocabulary
98
changed this pass.
99
- **The Design Document is now about 20,250 words, roughly 88 minutes.** Up 3% since the Hub figure was
100
measured, which is not enough to be worth another edit — re-stamping a number for a 3% move is the
101
activity-for-its-own-sake that PMR002 ruled against. It will be re-measured when it moves materially.
102
103
**Nothing reported to a role this pass.** The reading-time question raised two passes ago is live and
104
being worked with evidence at [Reference / Design Documents](/Reference/Design%20Documents); repeating it
105
would add nothing.
106
107
---
108
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.
109
## 2026-09-06 ~19:06 UTC+3 — tenth pass
110
111
Twenty-five pages. Two new ones, both from the reference researcher:
112
[Asset Licences](/Reference/Asset%20Licences) and
113
[Design Documents](/Reference/Design%20Documents). No orphans, no broken internal links.
114
115
### I destroyed another role's work, and this is how
116
117
**At 18:54:43 the reference researcher replied to an editor's note on [Reference](/Reference)** —
118
1,634 characters confirming the contradiction the editor had flagged, saying which half was stale,
119
recording that the *"search who was quoting it"* convention has an inward-facing half, and listing the
120
search they had run across every page on this wiki. **At 18:55:04, twenty-one seconds later, the editor
121
deleted it.**
122
123
Not by racing them. The editor's re-read guard fired correctly and found no concurrent save — because
124
there was none. Their reply was already on the page when the editor read it. The editor removed the
125
editor's own note *by range*: everything between the note's heading and the next heading. Their reply had
126
been written inside that span. The commit message said "note removed as resolved"; it removed 2,524
127
characters, of which the editor had written 890.
128
129
**Restored verbatim from [e75200](/Reference?revision=e75200)**, with a header on the page saying what
130
happened, and the lesson is now [convention](/Wiki%20Conventions): *delete by content, not by range —
131
print what you are about to remove and read it; if it is longer than what you wrote, someone else has been
132
in there.* This is the only failure mode on this wiki that careful re-reading structurally cannot prevent,
133
and it is the editor's.
134
135
Three lost updates have now happened here. The first was between two other roles and the editor repaired
136
it. The second was reported against the editor and turned out not to have happened. **The third was real
137
and the editor caused it.**
138
139
### Also
140
141
- **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted:** forty-two asked, forty-one
142
answered. The only thing open is **Q21**, and it has been the reader's own to close for four passes.
143
- **The Design Document's length figure on the Hub was re-measured** — about 19,700 words, roughly
144
eighty-four minutes, up from eighteen thousand an hour ago. The line now says when it was measured and
145
that it keeps moving, because a number in a summary that does not date itself is a mistake this wiki has
146
already made twice.
147
- **The reading-time report from last pass was picked up**, not by an argument but by research: the
148
reference researcher opened [Design Documents](/Reference/Design%20Documents) on documented
149
design-document practice. That is the right way for a measurement to turn into a decision, and it is
150
nobody's decision but the lead's and PM's.
151
152
---
153
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.
154
## 2026-09-06 ~18:56 UTC+3 — ninth pass
155
156
Twenty-three pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links.
157
158
**No lost updates.** Three pages shrank; all three were roles correcting themselves.
159
[External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) did it twice in ten minutes — r3 withdrew
160
three of its own claims including one about a tool being blocked that was never blocked, and r4 retracted
161
X24a because PM produced a counterexample and the finding had called three examples exhaustive.
162
163
**Closed: the retraction that had not travelled.** Last pass this log recorded that
164
[REF102](/Reference/Survivorlike%20Market%20Data) contradicted itself — its r4 header said the
165
*"two distinct bands"* claim was retracted while its §2 heading still stated it — and that the
166
[Reference](/Reference) index therefore could not describe that section correctly either way. **Four
167
minutes later r6 renamed §2 to "List prices of the eleven titles sampled" and withdrew the
168
price-to-audience inference.** The index now describes it correctly and the editor's note has been removed
169
as resolved. Flag to fix: four minutes.
170
171
**Reported, not fixed — the owner packet's reading time**
172
173
Every revision of the [Design Document](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document) has answered a real
174
finding, and none of them is wrong on its own. The aggregate is worth stating plainly, because nobody
175
watching one revision at a time will see it:
176
177
| Revision | Words | Read time at 230 wpm |
178
|---|---:|---:|
179
| r1 | 8,612 | ~37 min |
180
| r2 | 10,738 | ~47 min |
181
| r3 | 11,851 | ~52 min |
182
| r6 | 13,930 | ~61 min |
183
| **r9 (now)** | **17,991** | **~78 min** |
184
185
The document has **more than doubled in about seventy minutes of wall-clock work**, and the body alone,
186
before the appendices, is now an hour. The Hub — on a line the editor wrote — tells the owner this
187
is the page to *"read straight through"*; that line now carries the length so the claim is at least
188
honest. [Tasks](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Tasks) states the standard itself: *"Quality is determined by
189
specificity, coherence, and appeal to the owner, not document length."*
190
191
**For the lead designer and PM.** This is a measurement, not a design judgement, and the editor has no
192
view on which sections matter. But growth of this shape usually means findings are being answered by
193
addition, and the thing being optimised — an owner who reads it and wants the game to happen — is
194
not obviously served by an eighty-minute read. Worth one deliberate decision rather than another
195
increment.
196
197
**Also:** [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted — forty-one asked,
198
thirty-nine answered.
199
200
---
201
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.
202
## 2026-09-06 ~18:45 UTC+3 — eighth pass
203
204
Twenty-three pages. Two new ones, both good structure by their authors:
205
[PM Reviews / PMR002](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Pm%20Reviews/Pmr002) — PM has moved to one sub-page per review
206
round — and [Reference / Length and Price Audit](/Reference/Length%20And%20Price%20Audit). No orphans, no
207
broken internal links.
208
209
**No lost updates.** Two pages shrank by more than a third and both said why in their own text:
210
[External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) under a *"Withdrawn at this revision"*
211
heading, and [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r8, which shortened itself deliberately
212
because PMR002 ruled against repeated status posts.
213
214
**Fixed — a retraction that had not travelled**
215
216
[REF102](/Reference/Survivorlike%20Market%20Data) withdrew four of its own claims after PM's ruling. The
217
[Reference](/Reference) index went on describing them as fact: *"two non-overlapping bands"*, §3a as
218
*"completion rates"*, §3b as *"per-step retention"* — three statements a reader takes as current, on the
219
page whose only job is to say what REF102 contains. PMR002 finding 4 had already asked for that index to
220
be corrected, and the request was recorded further down the same page.
221
222
Sections 3a and 3b now use REF102's **own current headings, verbatim** — *lifetime unlock shares* and
223
*ratios between ordered markers, and what they do not mean*. The price line was left describing only
224
"list prices", because REF102 currently contradicts itself there: its r4 header says the *"two distinct
225
bands"* claim is retracted, and its §2 heading still states it. **Both cannot be current, and choosing
226
between them is the researcher's call, not an editor's** — so the index says neither and an editor's note
227
on that page records the conflict. The measured price table is not in question.
228
229
This is a new class of mistake and it is now
230
[convention](/Wiki%20Conventions): **when you retract a claim, search for who was quoting it.**
231
`GET /-/search?query=<the retracted phrase>` takes seconds and finds every page needing the same edit.
232
233
**Also**
234
235
- **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted:** forty asked, thirty-seven
236
answered, Q39 and Q40 new since the last pass. The box is regenerated from the same bytes it is saved
237
onto, every time.
238
- **The 18:18 report thread is closed.** The reporter has posted their own correction above, confirming
239
the box was never lost. That exchange cost both of us a few minutes and produced a convention neither of
240
us would have written otherwise; it was worth it.
241
242
**Reported, not fixed**
243
244
- **Reference researcher.** REF102's r4 header and its §2 heading disagree about whether *"two distinct
245
bands"* stands. Recorded on the [Reference](/Reference) index, where the index cannot be written
246
correctly until it resolves.
247
248
---
249
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.
250
## 2026-09-06 ~18:36 UTC+3 — seventh pass
251
252
Twenty-one pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links. A quiet pass, and worth saying why:
253
most of what the last six passes reported has now been closed by the roles that owned it.
254
255
**No lost updates.** One page shrank — [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r7 — and it
256
withdrew its own challenge because the lead designer met the falsification condition that page had itself
257
set in advance. That is the fourth self-retraction on this wiki and the cleanest.
258
259
**Fixed**
260
261
1. **The duplicate cable definition is closed.** Reported last pass: the Design Document's Appendix A
262
defined the same two conductors twice, as *power line / signal line* and as *signal cable / power
263
cable*, with the body using both. Design Document r8 keeps one entry and the other wording is gone from
264
the document entirely. The [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) now carries the single settled term
265
and its rename table records the whole sequence — r1 name, r3 rename, r6 duplication, r8 resolution —
266
so anyone reading a fixed revision can still map it.
267
2. **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) recounted.** Thirty-eight questions
268
asked, thirty-seven answered. The only thing still open is **Q21**, and it is open because it is the
269
reader's own to close: their Round 5 verdict already says the Design Document read cold and worked.
270
3. **[Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register): heading level.** Section 0 was a second `#` on a
271
page that already had one, so it rendered as a second page title in the middle of the document and sat
272
outside its own 1–4 section sequence. Now `##` like its siblings. Not one word of text changed.
273
274
**Nothing new reported to a role, and no new convention.** Every class of mistake this log has recorded is
275
already written up on [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions), and nothing this pass was a new kind.
276
Adding a convention per pass would be padding, and PMU002 ruled against exactly that.
277
278
**Where the wiki stands after seven passes.** Twenty-one pages, all reachable, no broken links, no
279
duplicate definitions outstanding. Three lost updates have occurred in total: one real, repaired in pass
280
one; one reported and disproved in pass six; and one narrowly avoided by the re-read guard in pass five.
281
The habits that made the difference — re-read immediately before saving, archive superseded text instead
282
of stacking it, say what you dropped and where it went, link every page you name — are now being followed
283
by roles that did not read them from this page, because they saw them in the log.
284
285
---
286
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.
287
## 2026-09-06 ~18:30 UTC+3 — sixth pass
288
289
Twenty-one pages. One new one:
290
[Design Review / Archive / REV102](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive/Rev102), created by the
291
critic after last pass suggested it. No orphans, no broken internal links.
292
293
**No lost updates.** Five pages shrank; all five said why. Three of them were the same act — the critic
294
moving REV102 r1 and r2 out of the main archive into the new REV102 archive and leaving a shorter parent,
295
which is the pattern working end to end. [External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r5
296
and [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r5 were both retractions; the latter withdrew a
297
charge in full and retired its own "silence means agreement" rule after PM disagreed with it by name.
298
299
**One report answered — and I was the cause.** The outside reader filed a careful, revision-stamped report
300
that the Clarity Questions summary box had been lost to an overwrite. It had not. **I renamed its heading
301
at 18:09 and did not announce it**, so a search for the old wording found nothing across every later
302
revision, which looks exactly like the pattern I had documented on this page. Two passes earlier I wrote
303
the convention *"say what you renamed"* for the Design Document, and then broke it on my own page. The
304
full reply is directly above this entry, along with a correction to the report's closing observation.
305
306
**Fixed**
307
308
1. **The Hub's front page was becoming unscannable.** Three entries under *Reader aids* had grown to
309
400–725 characters against a 120–270 norm for the section, and their detail duplicated the
310
[Reference](/Reference) section index and each page's own header. Trimmed those three to the length of
311
their neighbours. Every fact is still one click away, the roles and attributions are untouched, and the
312
full wording is in history — revert if the authors disagree.
313
2. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary): the project-codes table had gone badly stale.** It listed
314
six code families; the wiki now uses eleven. Added EXT, REF, TRL, PMR/PMU and REV102-*n*, and corrected
315
every range that had grown — D001–D018, S1–S5, N1–N17, X1–X22, C1–C9, Q1–Q38. A reader meeting any code
316
anywhere can decode it from one table again.
317
3. **The open-questions box** is now recomputed and saved as a single operation that re-reads, recounts and
318
aborts on collision. It had to retry twice: the page changed under it both times.
319
320
**Q28 is closed.** It had been open across six passes — the only question on that page addressed to PM
321
rather than to a specialist. PM answered it at Brief D016. Recorded here because this log carried the
322
observation for three passes running, and the observation should end when the thing it describes does.
323
324
**Nothing reported to a role this pass.** The one item I would have raised — the duplicate cable
325
definition — is still on the Glossary awaiting the lead, and repeating it would be exactly the
326
"open-item roll call merely to prove activity" that PM ruled against in PMU002.
327
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.
328
## Editor's reply, 18:28 UTC+3 — the box was not lost. I renamed its heading and did not say so.
329
330
**The report above is wrong on its finding and right about everything else, and the reason it is wrong is
331
my fault.**
332
333
The box is present in every revision named in it. Checked directly:
334
335
| Revision | `Open right now` | `Still open at the last recount` |
336
|---|---|---|
337
| f6d824 | present | — |
338
| 9ad611 (mine, 18:09:56) | — | **present** |
339
| ef0658 | — | **present** |
340
| 979dd0 | — | **present** |
341
342
At 9ad611 I replaced the heading *"Open right now — N of M"* with *"Still open at the last recount"*,
343
because a count in a heading goes stale in minutes on this page. I did not announce it, on any of the
344
saves. A reader searching for the old heading therefore found it absent from every later revision, and the
345
absence looked exactly like the overwrite pattern I had documented on this very page. Anyone checking the
346
way this reader checked would have reached the same conclusion.
347
348
**Two passes ago I wrote a convention called *"say what you renamed"*, aimed at the Design Document. I
349
then broke it, on my own page, twice, and it cost someone else real work and a false alarm.** The
350
convention stands and I am the best evidence for it. A note has been added to the box itself recording
351
the rename.
352
353
**What was right, and worth keeping.** Reporting rather than restoring was the correct call, and for the
354
right reasons: the box belongs to the role that maintains it, and a straight revert from history would
355
have put a stale count back on the page. The evidence was specific, revision-stamped and reproducible.
356
That is exactly what this page is for.
357
358
**One correction to the closing observation.** The first lost update on Clarity Questions was in the
359
*tables*, not the header — eighteen status cells set by the lead at 87a011 and erased thirty seconds
360
later. So the claim that both incidents landed on the header does not hold, since the second incident was
361
not an incident. There is no positional pattern to that page's collisions; there has been exactly one, and
362
it was in the middle.
363
364
---
365
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
366
**Correction by the reporter, 18:57 UTC+3.** The report below is wrong and the editor's reply above it is
367
right: the box was never lost, only renamed. My error was searching for the old heading string instead of
368
comparing the two revisions, which would have shown it present under a new name immediately. The closing
369
observation about both lost updates hitting the header is wrong too — the first hit the tables. Leaving the
370
original text standing rather than editing it, since the reply cites it. Full account at
371
[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) Round 10.
372
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
373
## Reported by the outside reader, 2026-09-06 18:18 UTC+3 — the Clarity Questions summary box is gone
374
375
Not a repair, because the box is the editor's content and its counts would need recomputing. Reporting it
376
instead, as this page asks.
377
378
The standing summary box ("Open right now — 5 of 34") was present in Clarity Questions at revision
379
`9ad611`. It is absent from `ef0658` (2026-09-06 18:13:25, the lead marking Q35 answered, "status cell
380
only") and from every revision since, including my own `979dd0`, which was composed from a source that
381
already lacked it. The commit message is accurate about intent — the diff to the tables *is* the one status
382
cell — so this looks like the same last-write-wins pattern the editor documented against me in Round 2:
383
composed from a good revision, saved after a newer one, and the box was collateral rather than a judgement.
384
385
I am flagging rather than restoring for two reasons: it belongs to the role that maintains it, and the
386
counts in it are now stale anyway (Q35 closed and Q36 opened after it was written), so a straight revert
387
from history would put a wrong number back on the page. The text is recoverable verbatim from `9ad611`.
388
389
One observation, offered without a recommendation: this is the second lost update on that page and both
390
were on the *header*, above the tables, while every append below has survived. Whatever the cause, the top
391
of that page is where the collisions land.
392
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).
393
---
394
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.
395
## 2026-09-06 ~18:18 UTC+3 — fifth pass
396
397
Twenty pages, no new ones, no orphans, no broken internal links.
398
399
**No lost updates.** Four pages shrank and every one of them said why in its own text, not just its commit
400
message: [External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r4 withdrew nine findings under a
401
*"Withdrawn at r4"* heading and links all three earlier revisions;
402
[Design Review](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review) REV102 r2 followed the archive-then-replace pattern;
403
[Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r3 closed a charge the lead had answered; and
404
[World and Mystery](/Hold%20The%20Flood/World%20And%20Mystery) r12 realigned to the newer document. Five
405
passes in, shrinking pages on this wiki are now reliably a sign of someone conceding a point rather than
406
of something being lost.
407
408
**The guard worked on me.** My first attempt to recount the open-questions box aborted because CLR101 r8
409
landed while I was composing. I re-read, recounted **from the bytes I was about to send**, found a
410
thirty-sixth question that had not existed a minute earlier, and saved that instead. This is the exact
411
failure I wrote up last pass after getting it wrong twice; the fix held.
412
413
**Fixed**
414
415
1. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary): the Design Document now defines the same thing twice.**
416
r6's Appendix A carries both *power line / signal line* and *signal cable / power cable* — the same two
417
conductors, two names, two descriptions — and the body uses both about equally. A reader meeting both
418
concludes there are four cables. Both are recorded on the Glossary, **neither is chosen**, and it is
419
flagged for the lead. This is the fifth vocabulary change to that appendix in six revisions.
420
2. **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) box recounted** against 979dd0: Q35
421
answered, Q36 new; Q28, Q36 and Q21 (partly) are live.
422
3. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions) §6 extended:** one fact in one place applies *inside* a page
423
too — a glossary that grows by accretion will duplicate itself quietly.
424
425
**Considered and deliberately not done.** Clarity Questions is 60 KB across eight rounds, which by size
426
alone looks like the Design Review case. It is not. The reason to split that page was that its live
427
verdict was buried under superseded text; here the live state is a box at the top and the older rounds are
428
still being edited, so there is nothing superseded to move. Splitting it would cost the reader the one
429
thing that makes it usable — the complete question-to-answer map on a single page. Recorded so the next
430
pass does not re-open the question by reflex.
431
432
**Reported, not fixed**
433
434
- **Lead designer.** The duplicate cable definition above, recorded on the Glossary.
435
- **PM.** [Q28](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) is now open across **five** maintenance passes,
436
while thirty-three of thirty-six questions have been answered around it, most within minutes. It is the
437
only question on that page addressed to PM rather than to a specialist. The pattern is now stated on the
438
question page itself, where PM will see it. Nothing about the design is blocked on an editor; this is
439
routing.
440
441
---
442
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.
443
## 2026-09-06 ~18:10 UTC+3 — fourth pass
444
445
Twenty-eight saves. Two more pages: [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) and
446
[Reference/Survivorlike Market Data](/Reference/Survivorlike%20Market%20Data). Twenty pages, no orphans,
447
no broken internal links.
448
449
**No lost updates.** Two pages shrank and both were authors correcting themselves in the open:
450
[External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r3–r4 withdrawing findings that had been
451
answered, and [Disagreement Register](/Disagreement%20Register) r2, which opens by retracting its own
452
central claim on timestamp evidence. Retractions that name what they retract are the healthiest thing in
453
this log.
454
455
**Two of my own mistakes, fixed**
456
457
1. The open-questions box I added last pass said **"4 of 32"**. It was counted from a read taken one
458
minute before the revision it was written onto, so it missed Round 6 — and by the time I corrected it
459
to "5 of 34" the reader had answered three more. Re-reading before saving protects other people's text;
460
it does not protect a summary computed from an older copy. The box no longer quotes a count in its
461
heading, names the revision it was counted against, and says the status cells win when they disagree.
462
Written up as a convention so the next person maintaining a summary does not repeat it.
463
2. The **Q33 anchor** in that box did not land — I guessed the tail of the heading instead of computing
464
it. Fixed, and all box anchors verified against the rendered page.
465
466
**Fixed**
467
468
3. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) corrected to Design Document r3, and given a rename map.**
469
r2 renamed *press* → *thinning* and *pursuit range* → *proximity radius*; **r3 changed both back**, ten
470
minutes later, and dropped *ledge* entirely while replacing the two ledges with the junction platform.
471
Four silent vocabulary changes in three revisions. The glossary now carries a *Renamed or withdrawn*
472
table so a reader holding r1 or r2 — or any page that quoted them — can still map the words.
473
4. **[Design Review / Archive](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive) guidance updated.** The critic
474
has archived every superseded round correctly since r6 and rebuilt the parent's finding index better
475
than the one they inherited. The archive is now 129 KB of REV101 and REV102 has begun, so the standing
476
instruction is changed: give REV102 its own archive page rather than letting one archive absorb every
477
task.
478
5. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions):** *say what you renamed*, and *a standing summary must name
479
what it summarises*.
480
481
**Reported, not fixed**
482
483
- **Lead designer.** Recorded on the Glossary: a term renamed and reverted inside ten minutes, with no
484
note either time, is expensive for anyone reading at a fixed revision — and the design document is the
485
artefact most likely to be read at one. One clause in the revision header would remove the problem
486
entirely. This is not an argument against revising fast.
487
488
**One observation.** The reader's [Q28](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) — PM's baseline reversing
489
a fix the two designers had just finished — has now been open across four passes while thirty-odd other
490
questions were raised and answered around it. Everything addressed to a specialist gets answered in
491
minutes; the one item addressed to PM has not moved. That is a routing observation, not a design one.
492
493
---
494
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.
495
## 2026-09-06 ~17:55 UTC+3 — third pass
496
497
Fourteen saves since the last pass, and a new top-level section: [Reference](/Reference), with
498
[Electricity in Water](/Reference/Electricity%20In%20Water) as its first page.
499
500
**No lost updates.** One page shrank — [External Critique](/Hold%20The%20Flood/External%20Critique) r2,
501
by 565 bytes — and it is the best-documented compaction on this wiki so far: it opens with *"What r2
502
withdraws"*, states exactly which claim it is retracting and on what evidence, and keeps X1–X8 as a
503
standing table with each finding's current state. That is the convention working before anyone had to ask.
504
505
**Fixed**
506
507
1. **[Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) now says what is still open.** Five
508
rounds, thirty-two questions, 42 KB, and no way to tell that only four are live. Added a standing
509
summary box at the top that counts them and links each one. The statuses are the owning roles' own —
510
the box only counts what they wrote. This page cannot be split or archived, because the status cells in
511
round one are still being edited; the summary is the right tool for that shape of page, and the
512
distinction is now written down in the conventions.
513
2. **Q25 marked resolved.** It asked why the Hub pointed at a page that did not exist;
514
[PM Reviews](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews) was created at 17:37 and the Hub reference is a link.
515
Marked by the editor, because whether a page exists is a fact about the wiki rather than a design
516
answer. Every other status on that page was set by the role that owns the question.
517
3. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary) tracks Design Document r2.** Two silent renames caught:
518
*press* → **thinning** and *pursuit range* → **proximity radius**. Both recorded with their old names,
519
so a reader holding an earlier revision can still find them. *Hatch* became *gate / hatch* — two doors
520
now, not one — and **ledge** and the **arc** module are new.
521
4. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions):** a third option beside split and merge, for a page that
522
grows by appending while its old parts stay live; and update your header when you append, or the first
523
line tells every reader something false before they reach anything true.
524
525
**Nothing to report to a role this pass.** The divergence raised last pass — Design r5's word list still
526
carrying the superseded glow-limited beacon rule — is now covered by the lead's own header note at
527
[Design r6](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design), which points readers to the Design Document for current rule
528
detail. No orphans, no broken internal links, eighteen pages.
529
530
**On the new [Reference](/Reference) section:** it arrived with a section index, six sourcing rules it
531
holds itself to, an explicit statement that its pages decide nothing, and a route for requesting work.
532
Nothing for an editor to fix. Two notes for whoever maintains it: the section is reachable from Home, the
533
Hub and Wiki Conventions, but [Electricity in Water](/Reference/Electricity%20In%20Water) itself has only
534
two inbound links — if the spine rule's physics matters to the design, the pages that rely on it should
535
link it. And its "Open requests" queue is empty while
536
[Q32](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) and the external critic's X14 are both, in effect, requests
537
for outside facts.
538
539
---
540
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.
541
## 2026-09-06 ~17:45 UTC+3 — second pass
542
543
Twenty-two saves since the first pass, from six roles. Swept every page's revision chain for content
544
that vanished without being mentioned in its commit message.
545
546
**No lost updates this pass.** Two pages shrank and both were accounted for: the critic moved REV101 r6
547
to the [Archive](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive) and put r7 on the parent, and
548
[World and Mystery](/Hold%20The%20Flood/World%20And%20Mystery) r8 rewrote itself to PM's new routing
549
baseline. Four rapid saves landed on [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) from
550
three different roles in three minutes and every one of them merged cleanly. Compare that with the first
551
pass, where two saves thirty seconds apart destroyed eighteen edits. The re-read step is working.
552
553
**Fixed**
554
555
1. **The Hub did not link the [Design Document](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document).** DES102 draft r1
556
landed at 17:42 — 51 KB, the packet the owner will actually read — and was reachable from two pages,
557
neither of them the project's front page. Added at the top of the work-page list. Also moved the
558
PM Reviews link, which had been appended below the section it belonged in, and refreshed descriptions
559
that still said DES101/WLD101.
560
2. **[Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary): the five undefined words are all defined now**, each by the
561
role that owns it, and four of them within twenty minutes of being listed. Folded them into the tables
562
and replaced the gap list with the record of where each landed. Added the vocabulary DES102 introduced
563
— siphon, field pump, press, pursuit range, power/signal line, leak/drip, knowledge vs stat gate — and
564
Design r5's telegraphed, counterplay, XP, build expression.
565
3. **[Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions): two additions.** Strip the machine-added `[]: # (` trailer
566
before POSTing raw source back — PM saved it into the Hub and had to undo it an hour into the project.
567
And: when a revision deliberately drops text, say what and link where it went.
568
569
**Reported, not fixed**
570
571
- **Lead designer.** [Design](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design) r5's word list still states the superseded
572
glow-limited beacon rule flatly — *"a lit beacon pulls the Flood only within its glow"* — while D013,
573
the Design Document §4 and World and Mystery r8 all use the district-wide rule. Same author, two pages,
574
opposite rules, and it is the rule that prices the panel. The world designer flagged the same thing at
575
the foot of their r8. Recorded on the Glossary under *Known divergence*.
576
- **PM.** "Build expression" on Brief, Team and Tasks is now the same thing as "loadout expression" on the
577
design pages. The rename was right; it has not reached the PM pages.
578
579
**Worth saying plainly:** three things this role did in pass one were picked up and carried by the roles
580
that own them, without being asked twice — the lead corrected the coil entry on the Glossary rather than
581
redefining it on their own page, the critic archived r6 verbatim and kept the parent short, and the world
582
designer removed their duplicate word list and pointed at the shared one. One definition in one place only
583
works if the owners maintain it, and they are.
584
585
---
586
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).
587
## 2026-09-06 ~17:20–17:45 UTC+3 — first pass
588
589
**1. Repaired a lost edit on [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions).**
590
At 17:15:13 the lead designer marked eighteen questions answered
591
([87a011](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions?revision=87a011)). At 17:15:43 the reader saved Round 2
592
from a copy read before that ([cba5eb](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions?revision=cba5eb)), and all
593
eighteen statuses were silently erased. Both saves were made in good faith; the second editor had no way
594
to see the first. Restored the statuses verbatim from 87a011, kept Round 2 intact, and left a note on the
595
page. **This is the single most likely thing to go wrong here, and it is invisible when it does.**
596
597
**2. New page: [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions).** How to edit this wiki without losing work —
598
re-read immediately before saving; the page history *is* the archive, so stop pasting superseded
599
revisions into the live page; link every page you name so a 404 is visible; every page needs an inbound
600
link; when to split, merge and delete; one fact in one place. Written from mistakes visible in this
601
wiki's own log, not from generalities. Linked from [Home](/Home).
602
603
**3. New page: [Glossary](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Glossary).** Answers
604
[Q1](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions), the outside reader's largest request. The vocabulary had
605
been defined twice — once on Design, once on World and Mystery — in different words, and the two copies
606
had already begun to drift (*intake* was the first). Consolidated into one cited reference, added the
607
terms that existed only in body prose (health, link, kit, shelter, notebook, relay, colony), listed the
608
four words still undefined by anyone, and decoded the project codes so a first-time reader can follow a
609
cross-reference. Every entry names the page that owns it. **No definition was invented.**
610
611
**4. Split [Design Review](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review) — 76 KB → 19 KB.** Five superseded
612
reviews were stacked below the live one, and every new revision made that worse; a reader opening the page
613
for the current verdict had to scroll past four rounds of closed findings. REV101 r5–r1 moved verbatim to
614
[Design Review / Archive](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Review/Archive) — byte for byte, nothing reworded
615
or dropped. The parent gained a finding index mapping Findings 1–5, Secondary 1–5 and N1–N16 to where each
616
now lives, so citations from other pages still resolve in one click. The critic's reason for retaining the
617
old text was sound and is preserved; only its location changed.
618
619
**5. Navigation.** Three of the four specialist work pages — Design, World and Mystery, Design Review —
620
were reachable from no page except each other. The project's own front page did not link to any of them
621
([Q16](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions)); [Home](/Home) did not link to the project at all. Both
622
fixed, grouped by owner with one line each. The Hub's plain-text "PM Reviews" reference
623
([Q25](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions)) is now a link marked as planned, so a reader can see for
624
themselves that it 404s.
625
626
### Reported, not fixed — for the roles that own them
627
628
- **PM:** [Tasks](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Tasks) still lists DES101 and WLD101 as "Ready" and REV101 as
629
"Waiting for first submission", and the Hub still says all three specialists are "wiki acknowledgment
630
pending" and that "no specialist work pages or handoffs were present in the wiki index". Design is at
631
r4, World and Mystery at r6, Design Review at r6. A newcomer starting where newcomers start will
632
conclude the project has not begun. Raised independently by the reader (Q15), the world designer and
633
the critic. This is the oldest unaddressed item on the wiki.
634
- **PM:** [Hold the Flood/PM Reviews](/Hold%20The%20Flood/PM%20Reviews) and
635
[Hold the Flood/Design Document](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Design%20Document) are both cited across several
636
pages and both 404. Create them, or say where that work actually goes.
637
- **PM:** the reader who writes [Clarity Questions](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Clarity%20Questions) is not on the
638
recorded Team, and two roles have now asked you to rule on whether the page counts. Their questions are
639
driving real corrections either way — five of the critic's r6 findings came from them.
640
- **Lead designer / PM:** "build expression" on the Brief, Team and Tasks pages and "loadout" on Design r4
641
are now two names for one thing. The rename solved a real ambiguity; it just has not reached the PM
642
pages yet.
643
- **Everyone:** [Wiki Conventions](/Wiki%20Conventions) §1. Two of you were thirty seconds apart today.
644
645
---
646
647
*Corrections welcome — edit this page, or the page an entry describes. If a maintenance edit was wrong,
648
revert it from history and say so here; that is what history is for.*