[finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

Description

@os-sam

Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

The reading

The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
H23=1 H28=1

H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

What is and is not claimed

  • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
  • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
  • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

Why it is worth a card

The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

Neighbours, checked before filing

One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

Refs

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
       blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
      }
      } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
      })();
      (function(){
      try {
      var __m = "github.com";
      var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
      
      Skip to content

      [finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

      Description

      @os-sam

      Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

      The reading

      The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

      H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
      H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
      H23=1 H28=1
      

      H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

      In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

      Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

      So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

      What is and is not claimed

      • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
      • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
      • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

      Why it is worth a card

      The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

      Neighbours, checked before filing

      One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

      Refs

      Metadata

      Metadata

      Assignees

      No one assigned

        Type

        No type

        Projects

        No projects

          Milestone

          No milestone

          Relationships

          None yet

          Development

          No branches or pull requests

          Issue actions

          , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
          Skip to content

          [finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

          Description

          @os-sam

          Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

          The reading

          The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

          H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
          H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
          H23=1 H28=1
          

          H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

          In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

          Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

          So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

          What is and is not claimed

          • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
          • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
          • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

          Why it is worth a card

          The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

          Neighbours, checked before filing

          One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

          Refs

          Metadata

          Metadata

          Assignees

          No one assigned

            Type

            No type

            Projects

            No projects

              Milestone

              No milestone

              Relationships

              None yet

              Development

              No branches or pull requests

              Issue actions

              , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
              Skip to content

              [finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

              Description

              @os-sam

              Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

              The reading

              The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

              H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
              H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
              H23=1 H28=1
              

              H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

              In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

              Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

              So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

              What is and is not claimed

              • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
              • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
              • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

              Why it is worth a card

              The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

              Neighbours, checked before filing

              One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

              Refs

              Metadata

              Metadata

              Assignees

              No one assigned

                Type

                No type

                Projects

                No projects

                  Milestone

                  No milestone

                  Relationships

                  None yet

                  Development

                  No branches or pull requests

                  Issue actions

                  , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
                  Skip to content

                  [finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

                  Description

                  @os-sam

                  Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

                  The reading

                  The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

                  H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
                  H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
                  H23=1 H28=1
                  

                  H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

                  In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

                  Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

                  So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

                  What is and is not claimed

                  • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
                  • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
                  • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

                  Why it is worth a card

                  The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

                  Neighbours, checked before filing

                  One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

                  Refs

                  Metadata

                  Metadata

                  Assignees

                  No one assigned

                    Type

                    No type

                    Projects

                    No projects

                      Milestone

                      No milestone

                      Relationships

                      None yet

                      Development

                      No branches or pull requests

                      Issue actions

                      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
                      Skip to content

                      [finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

                      Description

                      @os-sam

                      Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

                      The reading

                      The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

                      H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
                      H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
                      H23=1 H28=1
                      

                      H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

                      In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

                      Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

                      So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

                      What is and is not claimed

                      • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
                      • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
                      • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

                      Why it is worth a card

                      The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

                      Neighbours, checked before filing

                      One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

                      Refs

                      Metadata

                      Metadata

                      Assignees

                      No one assigned

                        Type

                        No type

                        Projects

                        No projects

                          Milestone

                          No milestone

                          Relationships

                          None yet

                          Development

                          No branches or pull requests

                          Issue actions

                          , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
                          Skip to content

                          [finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

                          Description

                          @os-sam

                          Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

                          The reading

                          The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

                          H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
                          H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
                          H23=1 H28=1
                          

                          H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

                          In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

                          Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

                          So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

                          What is and is not claimed

                          • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
                          • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
                          • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

                          Why it is worth a card

                          The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

                          Neighbours, checked before filing

                          One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

                          Refs

                          Metadata

                          Metadata

                          Assignees

                          No one assigned

                            Type

                            No type

                            Projects

                            No projects

                              Milestone

                              No milestone

                              Relationships

                              None yet

                              Development

                              No branches or pull requests

                              Issue actions

                              , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
                              Skip to content

                              [finding] H22 files 94 of the patrol's 247 rows against a population the 2026-08-31 ruling says needs no cleanup — the census clause and the row family now disagree inside one file #14072

                              Description

                              @os-sam

                              Measured while implementing #13947 (PR #14071), from a real sweep run out of this container on 2026-09-01 (node scripts/pm/check-half-states.mjs, exit 0, 247 half-states found).

                              The reading

                              The per-family breakdown of that sweep's 247 findings:

                              H22=94 H2=37 H14=14 H19=13 H24=13 H26=12 H9=11 H5=10 H30=8 H6=6
                              H4=5 H36=5 H11=4 H8=3 H13=2 H20=2 H35=2 H38=2 H1=1 H15=1
                              H23=1 H28=1
                              

                              H22 alone is 94 of 247 — 38% of everything the patrol computes. H22 is "a CLOSED card still carrying a pm:* STATE label" (#10688), bounded to a 3-day closure window.

                              In the same rendered body, the H39 census clause says, verbatim:

                              Closed-card pm:* residue (H39 census, informational): pm:dispatched 2075, pm:queue 850, pm:blocking 29, pm:blocked 20, pm:on-hold 13, pm:awaiting-maintainer 2, oldest closed 2026-08-02; 555 carrying both pm:queue and pm:dispatched. Archive, not state — no cleanup is owed and none is planned (ruled 2026-08-31, 批 #13); readers scope pm:* queries to open cards.

                              So one clause of the report tells a reader that this residue is archive and no cleanup is owed, while another files ninety-four individual finding rows about members of it.

                              What is and is not claimed

                              • No claim that H22's predicate is wrong. Every one of the 94 rows is correctly computed; the question is whether the row should still be FILED after the ruling, not whether the state was read correctly.
                              • No claim that the ruling settles it. There is a real reading in which it does not: H22's window is the fresh 3-day residue, and its header argues the point explicitly — 「pm:dispatched is not descriptive, it is a claim of in-flight-ness … If that is a defect at 09:00 while the card is open and not a defect at 09:01 once it closes, the rule is about the board's tidiness rather than about the duty」. That argument predates the ruling (H22 is [finding] H8's coverage is a function of timing — a card that CLOSES still carrying pm:dispatched leaves the patrol's view forever; 129 have #10688; the census ruling landed 2026-08-31) and nothing has reconciled the two since.
                              • No remedy proposed. Several shapes exist (fold H22 into the census as a count; keep it and record why the ruling does not reach the 3-day window; narrow it to the labels the ruling did not cover). Choosing is a call for the lane.

                              Why it is worth a card

                              The patrol's body is budget-bound and its rows compete for that budget. Whichever way this is ruled, the answer moves 38% of the corpus. With the severity ordering landing in PR #14071, H22 sits in the inventory band and is trimmed first — so if the rows are wanted, they will now be the first thing omitted; if they are not wanted, the patrol is spending 38% of its computation and part of its render budget on them either way.

                              Neighbours, checked before filing

                              One targeted MCP semantic search (repo-scoped REST /search/* is 403 from this container — sessions are bound to their configured repositories), with a positive control in the same session: a control query returned #13947, so the empty-ish result below is a reading rather than a silent zero. 15 results. The nearest neighbours are the cards that produced the ruling and are all CLOSED — #13605 (the decision card that ruled the cleanup shape), #13526 and #13901 (the census findings behind it), #12907 (the prose that contradicted the strip-on-close convention). None of them asks whether H22 should keep filing rows afterwards. No open card covers this.

                              Refs

                              Metadata

                              Metadata

                              Assignees

                              No one assigned

                                Type

                                No type

                                Projects

                                No projects

                                  Milestone

                                  No milestone

                                  Relationships

                                  None yet

                                  Development

                                  No branches or pull requests

                                  Issue actions