Reframe the interface around composed posts, not republished entries

The channel publishes a post written from a hall entry -- condensed,
personal, reach-optimized -- not the entry itself. That changes what
this interface is for and where its boundary sits.

Composition is deliberately outside the interface. Composing is a
probabilistic editorial task, and Blueprint 48.1 forbids an LLM in the
mandatory request path, so an interface that composed on demand would be
non-deterministic exactly where determinism is the whole claim. It is
also editorial: a post speaks about a named person's work in
HelixForge's voice, and a review step inside the request path is a
review step nobody performs.

The contract now takes a composed post with a required reviewer, a cited
source entry and a consent basis. A post carrying none of those is
refused. Absence of objection is not consent, and in an audit trail an
unfaithful post looks exactly like a faithful one -- the defence is that
a human read it, the source is named, and both are recorded.

The first experiment is rebuilt accordingly. The old competition asked
how to fit a whole entry into Telegram; that question no longer exists.
The new one asks whether the portrait earns the 3072 characters of
caption limit it costs, which is a delivery question this interface
actually owns. Competition over editorial voice belongs to the campaign
and runs on the per-variant engagement this interface reports.

Adds T05b (composition and review), T05c (consent basis for the 94
existing participants, blocking public publication) and T11 (extracting
the campaign into pr-hall-of-helix).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014KmVxhJ35tCo7rE7UnLwWu

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1116572@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8ba9bb93-a72a-4883-b189-2499cce5c400

hypotheses/H-tg-textonly.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+fluid_hypothesis:
+  schema_version: "0.1"
+
+  id: "H-tg-textonly"
+  interface_id: "helix-forge-telegram-publishing"
+  state: "DRAFT"
+
+  title: "Text alone reaches further than a post constrained by a caption"
+
+  observation:
+    summary: >
+      Telegram limits a photo caption to 1024 characters, a quarter of the 4096 available to a text message. Attaching a portrait therefore constrains the composition it accompanies, and a post written to 1024 characters is a different piece of writing from one written to 4096.
+    evidence_refs:
+      - "canon:fluid-telegram/TelegramCapabilityCanon.md#MED-01"
+      - "pressure:P-register"
+    affected_cohorts:
+      - "telegram-subscribers"
+
+  pressure:
+    classes:
+      - "repeated_expectation_mismatch"
+    pressure_refs:
+      - "P-register"
+    severity: 0.6
+    confidence: 0.7
+
+  explanation:
+    claim: >
+      The scarce resource in a condensed post is room to say something specific. A generated portrait is decorative and interchangeable across entries; a concrete detail about what someone actually did is not. Trading three quarters of the available text for a picture spends the thing that makes a post worth reading on the thing that makes it look like everything else in the feed.
+    reach:
+      score: 0.4
+      explains:
+        - "P-register"
+      notes: >
+        Narrow but clean. It settles one delivery question decisively, and the
+        answer transfers to fluid-x and fluid-substack, which face the same
+        question under different feeds.
+
+  proposed_adaptation:
+    class: "presentation"
+    summary: >
+      Publish the post as a text message with a link to the source entry, and no attached visual.
+    implementation_scope: "interface_only"
+
+  backend_requirements:
+    required: false
+    requirement_refs: []
+
+  expected_outcomes:
+    - metric: "engagement_rate"
+      cohort: "telegram-subscribers"
+      target: 0.05
+      direction: "higher"
+    - metric: "source_link_rate"
+      cohort: "telegram-subscribers"
+      target: 0.02
+      direction: "higher"
+
+  guardrails:
+    - metric: "unreviewed_publication"
+      operator: "=="
+      threshold: false
+    - metric: "missing_source_attribution"
+      operator: "=="
+      threshold: false
+    - metric: "missing_subject_consent"
+      operator: "=="
+      threshold: false
+    - metric: "error_rate"
+      operator: "<="
+      threshold: 0.01
+
+  fitness_dimensions:
+    expected:
+      client_utility: 0.2
+      discoverability: 0.3
+      simplicity: 0.3
+      correctness: 0.0
+      security: 0.0
+
+  complexity:
+    expected_delta:
+      operation_count: 0
+      concept_count: 0
+      cognitive_load: 0.1
+    score: 0.05
+
+  risk:
+    level: "LOW"
+    reasons:
+      - "presentation only; no contract, authorization or consent change"
+      - "the simpler arm; nothing to attach and nothing to fail"
+
+  economics:
+    estimated_experiment_cost: 0.0
+    estimated_implementation_cost: 0.0
+    currency: "EUR"
+    expected_value_class: "MEDIUM"
+
+  learning_value:
+    score: 0.7
+    notes: >
+      If this wins, the campaign stops producing portraits for publication and spends that effort on the writing instead.
+
+  success_criteria:
+    expression: >
+      engagement_rate >= 0.05 AND no guardrail violation
+
+  failure_criteria:
+    expression: >
+      any hard guardrail violation
+      OR engagement_rate at or below the rival arm over the same window
+
+  competition:
+    group_id: "CG-tg-delivery"
+    alternatives:
+      - "H-tg-visual"
+
+  outcome:
+    status: null
+    summary: null
+    evidence_refs: []