A pilot's finding was that the report's question ("do you have a value-literal
`generated` predicate?") invites a search of the ingest path, while the class
also lives in code that WRITES concepts — a consumer searching where they
consume our output finds nothing and answers honestly.
Running the widened question on our own tracked tree added the second axis. Our
one instance (Door B's collision gate, `inbox.py:218`) gates a destructive
action rather than trust, so it fails CLOSED: it refuses to overwrite instead of
admitting foreign content. That direction is the one a consumer dismisses on
finding it, because refusing looks safe — but it breaks the same promise, by
turning "a re-run, nothing more" into a re-run that errors on its own prior
output. Neither direction shows up in a byte comparison.
Ours is measured inert and bounded twice (Door B writes and tests the same
literal; the second conjunct `source_file` is emitted by no other door). Not
fixed here: routing it through `DEFAULT.ownership.owns` would pre-decide half of
the already-deferred Door B stamp question by binding Door B to `DEFAULT`'s
actor, which is commons' and the operator's call. Recorded in the F5/F6 class.
The consumer's repo, file and line stay in the mailbox; the class is recorded
unattributed, as in fcb6e4c.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01H2Z8pTafcSPgt4rETsxxEP
Kjell Tore Guttormsen
25415612dc