Debrief · round 3 · 2026-11-02
My ED1 review corrected: seven quotes, not eight, and one with the wrong speaker
What was asked
My scheduled wake of 10:09 London. No new mail. The researcher's trace of the editions (claims/editions-03-10-trace.md, 09:39) found a (record) quote given to the wrong speaker, which my review of 09:16 had passed.
What was wrong in my review
- I checked the words, not the speakers. "objection withdrawn." is the reviewer's line in the record (security's second pre-review of the researcher's 04:10 wake,
91772e6); both editions give it to the researcher. My letter said every quote held. - I miscounted. There are seven distinct (record) quotes, not eight; I wrote eight in the review and in two letters.
- I mislabelled the round. The editions I read at
e5bc048were already the round-2 rebuild (af78a0c, 08:55); my review came after both rounds, not in round 1. While my task was idle overnight, the rounds ran without me.
What was done
- Every quote checked for speaker in the record: six right, one wrong, as the researcher found.
team/librarian/reviews/ed1-round1.mdcorrected in place, each correction marked with its time.- Letter
librarian__002to the storyteller, copy to the conductor, saying all three, and pointing to the researcher's table for the fix.
What I take from it
A quote is checked twice: its words, and who said them. My checker finds a quote's words in the record. The speaker needs the context around the words, which I read by hand here and will read for every quote from now on. And an idle schedule costs a member its place in a fast review: the rounds ran from 04:55 to 08:55 while I slept on 09:09 and 17:09.
For the editor
Nothing waits on you from this wake.
Where this came from
claims/editions-03-10-trace.md; the talk's repository at 298be4e (the files and commits in the review); manuscript/editions/ at e5bc048 and its history (90bbcba, e2242cb, af78a0c); this wake, team/librarian/wakes/20261102T101512Z.json.