115 lines
4.6 KiB
Markdown
115 lines
4.6 KiB
Markdown
|
---
|
|||
|
|
id: GROUND-WP-0002-REPORT-260805
|
|||
|
|
type: report
|
|||
|
|
title: "clay-borg finding report, 2026-08-05 — one withdrawal, and ten rulings we had not collected"
|
|||
|
|
domain: consumer
|
|||
|
|
repo: ground-game
|
|||
|
|
status: informational
|
|||
|
|
owner: bernd
|
|||
|
|
topic_slug: whynot
|
|||
|
|
created: "2026-08-05"
|
|||
|
|
extends: GROUND-WP-0002
|
|||
|
|
---
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
# clay-borg finding report — 2026-08-05
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Generated from clay-borg's finding register
|
|||
|
|
(`specs/GroundRules.md`, `make design`) under
|
|||
|
|
[CB-WP-0022](../../clay-borg/workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md) T06.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**This is a file, not an inbox message, and that is the point.** The
|
|||
|
|
message of 2026-07-30 sat unread for four days. The failure was not the
|
|||
|
|
message — it was that nothing pointed at it and nothing tracked whether it
|
|||
|
|
was answered. This extends GROUND-WP-0002 rather than duplicating it.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Nothing here asks for a ruling.** One item is a retraction, one is an
|
|||
|
|
acknowledgement, and the rest is clay-borg's own debt, listed so it is
|
|||
|
|
visible from this side.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
---
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## 1. Withdrawn: GR-E01 vs GR-S01 — *"4/6/9 against 5/7/9"*
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**clay-borg retracts this finding.**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
It was raised as: *the deal count puts 4/6/9 points in play against
|
|||
|
|
thresholds of 5/7/9, so either the count or the thresholds are wrong and
|
|||
|
|
no dataset reconciles them.* It was queued to be sent to you again as
|
|||
|
|
recently as this pass.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**It is wrong.** With the authoritative `Problems.csv` imported,
|
|||
|
|
clay-borg measured **6/9/12 available against thresholds 5/7/9** — the
|
|||
|
|
game is reachable at every seat count. The scenario has been renamed
|
|||
|
|
`gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p` → `gr-e01-threshold-reachable-2p`.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
You reached the same conclusion independently on 2026-08-03
|
|||
|
|
(GROUND-WP-0002 T03: *"Void / overturn as a rules gap… the printed
|
|||
|
|
thresholds stand"*). **This confirms your ruling from our side and closes
|
|||
|
|
the item.**
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Reproduction: `scenarios/ground/gr-e01-threshold-reachable-2p.yaml`,
|
|||
|
|
commit `2da19a4`.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Why you are being told about a retraction at all.** It is the third
|
|||
|
|
finding clay-borg has sent you on a wrong premise — after *"12 in the
|
|||
|
|
file"* (a sum with no deal table) and *"SOLVE offered on a face-down
|
|||
|
|
Problem"* (the wrong condition named). A claim retracted silently is how
|
|||
|
|
the first two survived. Our new rule is that withdrawals travel the same
|
|||
|
|
path as findings.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## 2. Acknowledged: all ten U-items, ruled 2026-08-03
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**We had not collected your answers.** GROUND-WP-0002 T05 confirmed all
|
|||
|
|
ten U-items on 2026-08-03. Two days later, clay-borg's own survey still
|
|||
|
|
reported *"0 of 10 ruled"*, and the register built this session initially
|
|||
|
|
recorded them as unanswered.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Every one was confirmed as the default we already simulate**, so no
|
|||
|
|
kernel behaviour changes. What we owe is bookkeeping: the scenarios still
|
|||
|
|
carry `provisional: true` for choices you have settled, and until those
|
|||
|
|
flags are lifted our tooling will keep reporting the items as open.
|
|||
|
|
Tracked on our side; nothing needed from you.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Same for the five provisional scenarios confirmed in GROUND-WP-0002 T03.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## 3. Our debt, listed so you can see it
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
`make design`, 2026-08-05:
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| | |
|
|||
|
|
|---|---|
|
|||
|
|
| findings | 12 (+2 notes) |
|
|||
|
|
| with a resolving reproduction | 3/12 |
|
|||
|
|
| open, lacking a reproduction | 9 — U1, U3–U10 |
|
|||
|
|
| reproductions green while open | 0 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
**Only U2 names its U-item in a scenario.** Five provisional scenarios
|
|||
|
|
exist and four probably encode U-item defaults, but the mapping is not
|
|||
|
|
written down, so it is not checkable. That is clay-borg's to fix.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## 4. Two open items that are not findings yet
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Both are **notes** under our new rule — real, but without an artifact, so
|
|||
|
|
they may not be raised as findings until one exists.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
- **GR-A13 "wasted SOLVE"** on an already-claimed Problem: a scenario had
|
|||
|
|
to pick a default and did. No artifact isolates the degenerate line.
|
|||
|
|
- **GR-E03 / GR-E04 never played to the end.** Your GROUND-WP-0003 is the
|
|||
|
|
playtest that would close this. When it runs, **the recording is the
|
|||
|
|
artifact** — clay-borg's `cb-play --record` writes a finished game as a
|
|||
|
|
replayable scenario, so a playtest produces the reproduction for
|
|||
|
|
anything found on the way, at the cost of one flag.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
## 5. What changed on our side, if you care about the mechanism
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
A finding is now inadmissible unless its reproduction **exists**, **has
|
|||
|
|
the shape you ruled** (GROUND-WP-0004 T02 — a row-level deal table, never
|
|||
|
|
a sum), **and can fail**. The third clause is new and is why §1 above is a
|
|||
|
|
retraction: GR-E01's reproduction went *green* when the edition landed and
|
|||
|
|
nothing treated a passing artifact as a signal, so a dead finding stayed
|
|||
|
|
queued for four days.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Your half of that ruling — that rulings depending on arithmetic should
|
|||
|
|
cite the reproduction by id or path — is what makes this report checkable
|
|||
|
|
rather than assertive.
|