Coding: adjudication and freeze | B4c

RETURN-B4: the return specification for the stage B4 blind sample

Frozen with the stage file. The packet builder serves it, the brief cites it, and the validator's schema is read from it.

Rule 0, in the contract's words

Rule 0. Single placement, exception on the record. A second-order theme carries one third-order theme: the one whose gate its material satisfies best; where more than one gate is satisfied, the theme's decide_when_both field decides. A second placement only where one cannot carry the material, and never silently: it needs its own distinct supporting concept, a written why_not_one in terms of what the single placement would fail to carry, a named dispensable one, and a line in multiplacement_log.jsonl. Three at most; beyond three, place one, record item-is-a-bag, and name every other theme the material satisfies under also_present, each with its own concept ids, so the cap drops no theme from the record. Every placement you make yourself names the concepts that carry each theme it places (support_by_theme, or --codes to the writer verbs). An unjustified extra is a defect. The log is a measurement: recurring (primary, additional) pairs are boundaries the scheme has not drawn, and stage C1 reads that table and the also_present record first. (J, 2026-10-11: the also_present record and the concepts behind a placement.)

How you read

Read the index page whole first. Open a family's page before you place anything into it, and list the families you opened in families_opened. Your packet holds second-order themes from many rooms, each headed by its room and its id and numbered by position. Each item gives the coder's label, the coder's note and every concept with the participants' words. Place each item from its own material. Your packet is complete in itself.

What you return, in this order

1. The prediction line, first, before any placement: the pair of third-order themes you expect to find hardest to tell apart in this packet, and one sentence why.

{"agent": "a017", "predicted_confusion": ["T3-007", "T3-011"], "why": "one sentence"}

2. The return line, one JSON line per item, in position order, and nothing else between the lines.

• sub, theme_id: the item's heading, <sub>/<theme_id>, copied exactly: the room's name, then the item's id (T2- and five digits, such as T2-08479).
• batch: the packet name on the packet's title line (such as S05-07). agent: your reader id as given to you. replicate: the replicate given to you with your reader id, or 1 if none is given. position: the item's number in the packet.
• third_order: the theme ids you place the item on, primary first. One id, unless rule 0's exception holds; never more than three.
• multi: true when third_order holds more than one id.
• why: for each id in third_order, what about THIS item put it there rather than its nearest neighbour.
• confidence: clear or arguable.
• read: whole (you read the label, the note and every concept) or theme-block (the label and note, and the concepts in part). No other value.
• exemplar_read: null. No exemplar is served at this stage.
• families_opened: the family ids whose pages you read the full tests of before placing this item.
• bag: true only when more than three themes would be needed and at least one theme beyond the one placed has three concepts of its own. Then third_order holds one id and why names the others. A bag with no other theme at the three-concept floor is not flagged a bag: bag false, also_present {}.
• t_start, t: when you began and finished the item (ISO time, as you can tell it).
• support: the concept ids your placement rests on, copied exactly from the item's own concept lines (C and seven digits, such as C0781518). Cite only concepts listed under the item you are placing; an id from another item, or one you do not see in the packet, is an error.
• also_present: {} unless bag is true. For a bag, the themes beyond the one placed that have at least three concepts of its own, twenty themes at most, each with those concept ids: {"T3-…": ["C…", "C…", "C…"]}. Twenty is a bound, not a goal: name only the themes you find at the floor; you need not reach twenty. A theme with fewer than three concepts of its own is not listed. support holds the concepts behind the placed theme; a theme in also_present never repeats the placed one.
• multiplacement_log: [] when multi is false. When multi is true, one record per theme beyond the first, the line rule 0 owes to multiplacement_log.jsonl:

3. The multiplacement record, on the same line, inside multiplacement_log:

{"sub": "...", "theme_id": "T2-.....", "key": "<sub>/<theme_id>", "batch": "S05-07", "agent": "a017", "replicate": 1, "position": 12, "primary": "T3-007", "additional": "T3-011", "why_not_one": "what this material carries that T3-007's gate does not reach", "why_this_one": "what in the material satisfies T3-011's gate, and its distinct supporting concept", "support_primary": ["C0781518"], "support_additional": ["C0781527"], "dispensable": "which of the two you would drop if forced to one, and what would be lost"}

Four rules on it:

• Distinct support. The additional theme needs its own supporting concept id; the same concept twice is the same reading twice, and is refused.
• why_not_one is about the material, not the scheme. "Both gates are satisfied" is not a justification, since decide_when_both settles that case; it must name what the single placement would fail to carry.
• dispensable is compulsory and may not be null.
• No line carries more than three themes. A third requires its own record and its own why_not_one against both the others. Beyond three, place one, set bag true, and name the others under also_present as above.

4. The second pass. After your last item, read your whole packet again and write one line per position, in position order, after all your first lines and before the end marker, each naming the line it revises: {"pass": 2, "revises": 12, "batch": "S05-07", "agent": "a017", "third_order": ["T3-007"], "changed": false, "why_changed": null}. When you would now place the item differently, changed is true, third_order holds the new placement and why_changed says what made you change it. The second pass never overwrites the first: your first lines stand as written.

5. The end marker and the confirmation.

{"sub": "...", "theme_id": "T2-.....", "batch": "S05-07", "agent": "a017", "replicate": 1, "position": 12, "third_order": ["T3-007"], "multi": false, "why": {"T3-007": "what about THIS theme put it here rather than its nearest neighbour"}, "confidence": "clear|arguable", "read": "whole|theme-block", "exemplar_read": null, "families_opened": ["G03", "G09"], "bag": false, "t_start": "...", "t": "...", "support": ["C0781518"], "also_present": {}, "multiplacement_log": []}
END-OF-RETURN

After your last line, write the end marker END-OF-RETURN on a line of its own. Confirm that you reached the end of the packet by writing that marker; a return without it is a partial return and is reissued.

Head, claude-v43-1

Under 3,000 words, rewritten whole at every close. Last written at B4c, 2026-10-13 (UTC). Stage B4 is complete: 3,288 contested items ruled, the blind sample built and checked, handback-B4.md and the interview brief written. The placements final are assign_final.jsonl at sha256 d3506a88…, unchanged by the check.

The method question, in one sentence

Can independently reconstructed case histories be composed into a shared dynamic account that supports explanations at successive levels of specificity, from population-wide patterns, through forms and subforms, to particular organizational histories, while keeping access to the evidence from which those explanations were developed?

The theory question is unchanged: when strangers organize on a clock they did not set, with no way to compel anyone and no goal given to them, what forms does organizing take, how do they differ in their functioning, and which of them keep the work alive?

Where the run stands

Stage A1 is closed. Stage B1 (the third-order scheme, 197 themes in 21 families), B2 (the pilot) and B3 (the fleet) are done. Stage B4 is done: the adjudication (B4a-01 to B4a-07), the blind sample's build (B4b to B4b-p4) and its check (B4c), closed at --cut interview. No later stage is delivered, and none is begun.

J's rulings on how a ruling is made (13 October; carry them)

• QB4-001 (J, 06:43 Berlin): "Ask it to stop. The point is to try to adjudicate. I imagine that the additions are really just the analyst trying to be nice. And not go back on what others said".
• J's rulings (06:45 and 06:47 Berlin): (1) A ruling chooses among the placements (reading A, reading B, my B1) and adds no theme beyond them. (2) It takes the union only when it names, for each theme it keeps, the separate concept that carries it; otherwise it chooses. (3) Re-rule packets 1 to 4's rulings that held a theme no placement held. Done at B4a-05.
• also_present (J, 09:09 Berlin) and QB4-002 (09:20): also_present lists only themes a reader placed, a reader listed under its own also_present, or my B1 named.
• QB4-003 (J, 11:29 Berlin): "count them. Themes a reader listed under its own also_present count in the bag test."
• Lone B1 themes (J, 12:28 Berlin): "Whatever the agent feels more comfortable with." I chose: in class 4 a theme only my B1 placed stands against the two agreeing readers only with three concepts or more of its own; with fewer it is left out; the readers' list stands where its test takes concepts, and where it takes none the item is unresolved. Class 3 unchanged.

How I applied them (rule 0 inside the placements). A concept counts toward a placed theme when that theme's must_show takes it and no field sends it to another placed theme. Order by concept count, ties by placements; at most three; a one- or two-concept theme is kept only when it leads its level on placements; a tie at the top places all tied themes; a theme alone at its level is kept; a theme both readers placed is not dropped on a count only my B1 tips. The bag test: placed themes and the readers' own also_present themes, each with the concepts its must_show takes that no placed theme holds; four with three concepts make a bag. Unresolved where no placement's test takes the material.

Stage B4

The selection (J's amended stage file). Class 1 (readers agree, equal to B1) 2,566 and class 2 (a proper subset of B1) 1,990 stand. Class 3 (readers differ) 2,393, class 4 (readers agree outside B1) 837 and class 5 (no B1 grouping) 58 were contested: 3,288 items, ruled in seven packets (out/_adjudication-B4/, chunks of 25; coder_conflicts.jsonl CC-001 to CC-072).

The adjudication (adjudication_report.md, full): 3,288 rulings; genuine-joint 1,651, author-error 571, scheme-ambiguous 451, item-is-a-bag 255, author-disagrees 208, reader-error 152; unresolved 185 (5.6%); named_neither 757 (23.0%); agreement before 0.491, after 0.646, not a reliability figure. Fields: must_show 252, discriminators 114, must_not_show 57, decide_when_both 28. Worst themes: T3-017 55, T3-033 34, T3-001 32, T3-023 26, T3-004 26. Boundaries ruled once: 64 pairs, 817 items. Class 4 (837): the readers' list 584, a B1 theme kept 162 (each with three concepts or more), unresolved 78. B2's predictions: 17 of 19 pairs split readers; pairs 17 and 18 never. Transmission rows (gold; pilot): 21, 30; 1, 0; 6, 12; 12, 8.

The blind sample (notes-B4.md, from "The blind sample, built at B4b"). J's rulings: 500 items, 250 uniform and 250 from the adjudicated items, by a recorded seed, the strata apart and never pooled; stratum R holds all 185 unresolved items (J, 17:10 and 17:21 Berlin: "We should have 685 in total"), so its 18 also in U or A are read twice; arm 1 two fresh DeepSeek V4.1 Flash readers per item on the route arm.json sets for B4; arm 2 OpenAI gpt-6-astra at medium effort, two replications, by the Codex orchestrator on J's computer; never pooled; no Claude reader.

• The build. Seed 20261013, streams "20261013:U", ":A", ":order", ":R", ":R-order", ":R-all-order", ":R-ua-order". sample-B4.jsonl (500) and sample-B4-R.jsonl (185). 48 packets, S05-01 to S05-48, in fleet ids on B2's renderer: 685 lines due, 667 distinct items. RETURN-B4.md as at B3, rule 0 in the contract's current words. run_manifest.json entry 16.
• The check (B4c; transmission-after-revision-B4.md). Readings: arm 1 999 (S05-23 r8 typed its room wrong, refused), arm 2 1,000, R 740 (reassign.jsonl, reassign-openai-astra.jsonl, readings-R-B4.jsonl). Fresh against settled, mean Jaccard: arm 1 U 0.657, A 0.544; arm 2 U 0.622, A 0.554. Readers' agreement and alpha: arm 1 U 0.781/0.776, A 0.664/0.658; arm 2 U 0.872/0.869, A 0.804/0.801; B3 on the same items U 0.781, A 0.514. Arm 1 U by class: class 1 0.930; class 2 (the line keeps my B1 grouping) 0.491, against its placed themes 0.786; U's adjudicated items 0.517; U without class 2 0.703. B2's gold figure (0.624) is the lower. G14 is among the three worst families in both arms and strata. R: readers 0.623 and 0.862 (B3 0.543); 104 and 134 of 370 readings wholly outside every earlier placement. Arm 2's replications agree within a packet far more than across packets (0.653 on the 18 read twice), so its agreement is an upper bound.
• The 79 unanimous items a fresh reader placed elsewhere (28 class 1, 51 class 2), each with a paragraph: the fleet's shared assumption 25, the settled line keeps my B1 themes 22, rule 0 applied differently 24, the scheme does not decide 6, the fresh reading misses a field 2. In most of the 25 the fleet counted concepts under a theme whose own must_not_show names the sibling.
• The handback (handback-B4.md): G14 decided worst (warframe t11 supports it, witcher t05 threatens it; a request between rooms separates them); for stage C1, T3-017|T3-031 (the canvas condition) as the boundary most likely to move, the homeland flag, G14's request siblings and the class 2 settled line.

Boundaries ruled, to carry (out/_adjudication-B4/boundaries.md).

• Packets 1 to 6. T3-023 is a change to the sub, T3-001 members' fakes. Calls toward T3-002, placing toward T3-038, a new mark toward T3-033, a further piece toward T3-041. An attack answered as a fight T3-005, watching or fixing T3-021. A fight, threat, peace or truce in the words T3-149; lines and space with none T3-010. Destroying T3-006, taking space T3-061. A joke with the canvas in the words T3-031; with none T3-017. A taunt at a rival T3-050. The homeland flag's acts toward T3-065 where a placement holds it.
• Packet 7. Thanks to makers T3-043, congratulations T3-009, an ally thanked T3-072. An account T3-073, grief T3-029, the canvas's end T3-117. A record T3-105 (cleaned copies included), a remake T3-057, the sub's banner or flair T3-156. A later canvas T3-054, the canvas sub's future T3-111. "The work" in T3-073 and T3-058 is the room's own.

Stage B3 and B2, in short

B3: fleet ids only (QB3-001, QB3-002); 1,212 batches, R = 2; assign_raw.jsonl 17,653 lines and b3_classes.jsonl. Gold fidelity 0.645; agreement Jaccard 0.786, alpha 0.782; G18 agreed least; readers deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash, medium effort, max_tokens 128,000. B2: gold fidelity 0.624 and pairwise 0.818; stability 0.807 is the floor every later figure is read against.

J's rulings that bind (carry them)

• Bags. No one cuts the bags (J, 12:24 Berlin). A bag stays one item: one theme placed, its others under also_present, each with three concepts of its own and named by a reader or my B1. out/recut/WITHDRAWN.json keeps the withdrawn split out of every view.
• The bound (J, 13:47). also_present names "twenty themes at most", each with three concepts of its own.
• The not-flagged bag (J, QB2-013). With no other theme at the three-concept floor, item_is_a_bag is false and also_present {}.
• Fleet ids (J, 09:14 and 12:15). Packets carry only fleet ids; returns are translated back before scoring; my files keep room ids.
• Codes by item (J, QB2-009). Each MANIFEST entry carries codes_by_item.

Standing words from J and the PI (carry into every head)

J's words for B1 (7 October 2026): "national elements are very important here"; "we need to get as much variance on organizing behavior early on so that later we have enough to create the model". National, political and conflict content is study material, named as plainly as any other. The handler's rule: a choice to leave out or soften content for any reason other than the study's goes to J first with mem.py ask, and the content stays meanwhile.

J on reading (11 October, 16:54 Berlin). Stop cutting room reads to a line length. Read room lines whole. Page a long read by line ranges or offset, never by truncating lines. Use --width N on a mem.py read if a clip is ever needed; the guard refuses cut -c after mem.py.

J on asking (11 October, 17:01 Berlin). Ask J with mem.py ask whenever a question is needed; asking does not stop the run.

The PI's clarifications (8 October, approved by J): the thresholds are the design's heuristic; the rule is unchanged.

How to work, from J (8 October, 23:45 Berlin, "can you do a hot change for the batching?"; relayed by the handler at 22:03Z; carry this paragraph into every head). A change in how I work, not in what I read or decide. Fewer turns. When two or more tool calls do not depend on each other's output, make them in one turn. Chain ordered commands in one Bash call with &&, so that a failure stops the rest; for example, the mem.py log or note just decided, then the next mem.py codes. Never put a write in the same turn as the read it depends on. Never run two writes to the same file as separate parallel calls. Keep one room's material per read, as now. Every tool still writes its own record; nothing about what I read or decide changes.

Two rules from J at B1b-29 (through the handler, 20:10Z; carry them into every head). Write rule 0 lines and bags with b1_multiplace_write4.py and b1_bags_from_file2.py, not the old scripts, which made one mem.py call per row of the whole table and grew to 8.5 minutes a write. Never end a turn while a job runs in the background; run every write and check in the foreground.

The pilot's declarations (from notes-B2.md)

• Agreement: Jaccard on placement sets (["T3-004"] against ["T3-004","T3-011"] scores 0.5). Fidelity is mean Jaccard against my set. Alpha uses distance 1 − Jaccard, chance over the round's pooled sets. Primary exact agreement is reported beside, never in place.
• Gold: 40 items in gold_items.jsonl, never shown to a reader.

The scheme

scheme_final.jsonl holds 197 themes (183 main, 14 rare, flagged there) in 21 families. It is frozen: stage B4 logs defects and never edits it.

Open, carried

• From B1. The ruling on testing G13, G14 and G15 as one index page. The B1d leftovers: 106 (line, kind) pairs over 81 episode lines; seven pairs of lines telling one event; E989; the cfb and finland records; shared-member counts that may include EA1r+K5p/lVBLesLhCFRrKOPN+I=; the 76 themes holding both T3-005 and T3-021 acts; T3-149 and T3-150 members that may hold T3-195. The second-order theme the scheme handles worst: argentina t06.
• Distinctions (none filed in _questions/): who started the work; wars told twice; rivals who turn partners (E1076, E1122, E1142, E1318); whose flag a shared flag is (E1118); who drove a bot (E1025); a room's own scripts barring it from sparing a neighbour (E843) or wrecking a protectorate (E1209); one member on both sides (E820, E947).
• The bag count. J counts 841 B1 bags; an older head said 846. Not reconciled. 26 older bags in packets 1 to 5 could list more named themes (QB4-003 named 43); the packet 4 item 197 also_present note.
• Defects for stage C1 (in adjudication_report.md). T3-017's and T3-001's discriminators against T3-031's canvas condition; T3-033's "first"; T3-023 and another sub's change; the homeland flag in the siblings' must_not_show; T3-018's "whose character"; T3-052 presumes a mark and an owner; T3-086 against T3-050; T3-003's and T3-043's discriminators on parts claimed after the work; "the work" in T3-073 and T3-058; T3-054 against T3-038 and T3-002 on a later canvas; T3-111 and a standing community; T3-087 against T3-058 for one person; T3-117's regret; T3-021 and a cleaned copy; T3-164's reach; T3-009's "lasted to the end" against T3-073's "what survived". From B4c (handback-B4.md): G14's request siblings; the class 2 settled line keeping B1 themes no reader placed (22 of 53 sampled); fleet unanimity resting on a field it contradicts (25 of 79).
• My doubts. The three-concept floor of the lone-B1 rule is my choice; it let a theme of mine stand against both readers in 162 class 4 items, some on my reading of whose work it is. Class 3 keeps one-concept themes of mine alone at their level. "The act its words lead with" decides some rulings on word order. The disjoint strata are my reading of J's ruling. B4's task differs from B3's by the sibling block, the bag flags and one rule 0 wording, so a difference from B3's figures is not the scheme's alone. The 79 verdicts are mine, made after seeing the fresh placements. Stratum A was drawn on the fleet's split, so its rise in agreement is partly regression.

Ledgers at this close

• B1 to B3: scheme_current.jsonl, families.jsonl (21), confusions.md (19 pairs), episodes-B1.jsonl (1,341); notes-B2.md, pilot_report.md, stability-B2.md, gold_items.jsonl (40), author_items.jsonl (50), scheme_final.jsonl (197); notes-B3.md, assign_raw.jsonl (17,653), multiplacement_log.jsonl (3,171), b3_classes.jsonl (7,844), defects.jsonl (63), return_waivers.jsonl (74), fleet_ids.jsonl.
• B4: notes-B4.md; transmission-B4.md; coder_conflicts.jsonl (72); disagreements.jsonl (3,288; superseded versions kept, the last 20261013T131513Z); assign_final.jsonl (7,844); adjudication_report.md (full); out/_adjudication-B4/; sample-B4.jsonl (500) and sample-B4-R.jsonl (185); RETURN-B4.md; out/_packets-B4/ (22 pages, 48 packets, MANIFEST.json); run_manifest.json (16 entries); reassign.jsonl (999), reassign-openai-astra.jsonl (1,000), readings-R-B4.jsonl (740); transmission-after-revision-B4.md; handback-B4.md; the B4c interview brief in out/interview/; out/_analysis/b4b_*.py and b4c_*.py with their records.
• Asks QB2-001 to QB2-014, QB3-001 to QB3-005, QB4-001 to QB4-003 are answered.

Rules kept

• Never type an id, an order or a name from memory; check with jq or a script. Never log a write before the tool answers. Count a ledger's lines after appending.
• There is no --kind close and no --kind episode; log those as notes.
• A question to J is mem.py ask "<question>" --assume "<meanwhile>". Read an answer with mem.py asks <id>.
• Never put a placeholder or a no-op in a command or a log line. Never put an Edit or Write and the read, dry run or validator run that checks it in one turn. Count the head's words before the closing line.
• Never write an id-like token the run does not define in the head, such as a D or a P followed by digits: done.sh reads it as an unresolved link.
• The permission check refuses: "=w="; shell for and while loops, and words beginning "for_"; shell functions, brace groups and heredocs; awk with system() or $ fields; a variable set from $(...), and some python3 -c scripts; jq with a test() regex, and env-var prefixes; cat or jq on out/diary/; cut -c, cut -b and colrm after mem.py, cite.py or a helper (use --width). Write a script file in out/_analysis/ instead. .git is read-denied, and so are reads outside the run folder.
• mem.py pages long output; fetch the rest with --offset. A Bash output over about 30 KB is saved where I cannot read it; page it. A Read of a file over 25,000 tokens is cut; read it by offset and limit.
• After a compaction the guard requires the head and stage file read again and the exact line "compacted; head reconciled" through mem.py log --kind note, in a call of its own, before any other step.
• In B4: a ruling never cites a room note; a correction goes through --replace, never a hand edit; nothing in run_manifest.json is edited, an entry is superseded by a new one.

The next comparison

Stage B4 is closed at --cut interview. No later stage is delivered, so none is begun. What stage C1 needs from B4 is named in handback-B4.md ("For stage C1"), transmission-B4.md and transmission-after-revision-B4.md. The per-theme agreement it needs is stage B3's (out/_analysis/b3_check_record.json).

The onset contrast (contract section 5), written at A1a, 2026-10-06, before any room is read

Target length: under 900 words, the member lists apart.

The rule

The clock is onset_first_code_hour in rooms.jsonl: the hour, since the canvas opened, of the room's first coded turn. It is populated for all 705 rooms.

• Early side: the first coded turn falls after hour 0 and before hour 3. These rooms wrote about the canvas within its first three hours, while it was still mostly empty.
• Late side: the first coded turn falls after hour 48. These rooms first wrote about the canvas in its third day or later, when most of it was already drawn and held.
• Rooms with a first coded turn before hour 0 (r/italy at -1.14, r/yogscast at -18.58) stand on neither side. Their first coded turn comes before the canvas existed, so it does not date when they came to it. In r/yogscast that turn (yogscast/c0024, at -18.58) is an offer of spare streaming keys. Its first canvas turn is yogscast/c0001 at hour 5.03.
• The middle, hours 3 to 48, is left out. With the two rooms above, 513 rooms stand on neither side.

The bounds come from the canvas's own clock, not from these figures. Hour 3 ends the first stretch of the empty canvas. Hour 48 starts the third day. Placement stopped at hour 73. I chose the bounds after seeing the quartiles (q1 3.76, median 9.51, q3 24.82). That knowledge shaped the bounds, and I say so here.

Size of each side

• Early: 131 rooms (of 705).
• Late: 61 rooms (of 705).

The confound, before anything else

Onset on this clock is in large part a measure of how much a room wrote. A room that writes more has more chances to write early. The two sides differ a hundredfold in size. The early side's median items_in_window is 5067 (q1 1468, q3 10885). The late side's median is 33 (q1 18, q3 131). The canvas areas differ the same way: medians of 1564 px and 152 px. Contract section 5 says code mass measures corpus size, not conduct. So any difference between the two sides must first be shown not to be a size difference.

I carry a held-size comparison with the main one. It uses the rooms on each side whose items_in_window lies in the census's middle half (156 to 2770). That leaves 41 early rooms and 12 late rooms. Twelve is thin, and any claim from it is labelled thin (rule 8).

What I expect to differ

These are expectations, written before reading, for stage C2 to test against the model's arrows.

1. Late rooms will organize around finding room on a full canvas. I expect asking neighbours for space, moving the drawing, fitting into gaps and treaties made to be let in. Early rooms will organize around claiming and enlarging a space and then holding it against others.
2. Late rooms will have shorter organizing lives, with fewer hours between the first and last coordinating turn. Their record will hold more single calls with no visible reply. Some late rooms will show no coordination at all: one notice that something of theirs appeared on the canvas (r/watchmen, r/yerbamate are of this kind on the screen).
3. Early rooms will more often name rivals and keep fights going over many hours. Late rooms will more often name a host or a neighbour who let them in.
4. The held-size comparison will keep difference 1 and lose most of difference 3. If difference 1 also vanishes at held size, then onset on this clock is size and the contrast shows nothing about timing.

Members, early side (131)

bitcoin, halo, overwatch, pcmasterrace, schoolidolfestival, dota2, leagueoflegends, thesilphroad, smite, totallynotrobots, worldoftanks, streetfighter, clashroyale, counting, india, mls, wow, hearthstone, ElderScrolls, globaloffensive, oneplus, australia, tagpro, thenetherlands, 2007scape, dankmemes, splatoon, pokemon, texans, kingdomhearts, teslamotors, philippines, undertale, babymetal, smashbros, eve, spacexmasterrace, mylittlepony, twitchplayspokemon, homestuck, cloud9, tf2, formula1, puzzleanddragons, rit, thailand, zootopia, titanfall, de, ice_poseidon, baylor, cirkeltrek, giivasunner, eagles, TheGreatGreenBox, AprilKnights, brasil, uofm, startrek, asktransgender, eder, fivenightsatfreddys, Rainbow6, mechanicalkeyboards, drugs, argentina, europe, ockytop, harrypotter, fullcommunism, frankocean, anarchism, rotmg, bindingofisaac, catholicism, feedthebeast, wholesomememes, monsterhunter, patriots, GreenEmpire, kanye, ireland, luciomains, radiohead, prequelmemes, nintendo, sweden, donaldglover, haskell, danganronpa, redhotchilipeppers, traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns, newzealand, unitedkingdom, paladins, france, habs, romania, leafs, h3h3productions, rwby, warthunder, rickandmorty, EraseThePlace, starlightstage, megaman, stlouisblues, transgender, chicubs, touhou, wallstreetbets, foxes, DestinyTheGame, ainbowroad, nascar, evex, runescape, lakers, nlsscirclejerk, rocketleague, PurplePixels, asexuality, kirby, denmark, floridagators, chile, portugal, suomi, trees, crusaderkings, dwarffortress

Members, late side (61)

littlewitchacademia, vermont, fxKorea, guatemala, vietnam, latin, COSI, sooners, wsu, k_on, CelticFc, UMiami, watchmen, corridor, MiamiHurricanes, UPenn, mysterydungeon, nVade, parabola, ukplace, OrderOfTheKoi, DevonUK, natsume, seventeen, udub, mcgillrobotics, sheffield, bees, DiamondClub, Villanova, CSUFoCo, quq, Clannad, ibo, VelvetUnderground, heyyea, ManningPlace, Redox, Dorset, OKState, ElSalvador, DCFU, TheID, crystalclear, mamamoo, bigbang, signal, rainbowgrid, Cornwall, TheAdventuresofTintin, sakartvelo, azores, aeskwadraat, carletonu, Produce101, aeon, tetris, cgpgrey, UNLincoln, pgang, azerbaijan

Held size (items_in_window 156 to 2770)

Early, 41: totallynotrobots, ElderScrolls, oneplus, tagpro, splatoon, texans, undertale, spacexmasterrace, twitchplayspokemon, homestuck, cloud9, rit, thailand, zootopia, cirkeltrek, giivasunner, eagles, TheGreatGreenBox, AprilKnights, uofm, ockytop, frankocean, luciomains, donaldglover, haskell, danganronpa, redhotchilipeppers, traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns, EraseThePlace, starlightstage, megaman, transgender, touhou, foxes, nlsscirclejerk, PurplePixels, asexuality, kirby, floridagators, chile, dwarffortress.

Late, 12: littlewitchacademia, vermont, vietnam, latin, k_on, mysterydungeon, nVade, ukplace, udub, ibo, ManningPlace, cgpgrey.

The lists come from mem.py facts --field onset_first_code_hour --where ... calls made in leg A1a and logged in _mem_reads-A1.jsonl.

Recomputed on J's ruling 3, leg A1b-20, 2026-10-07

J ruled on 7 October 2026 that the onset is the room's first coded turn at hour 0 or later. Turns before hour 0 are reported apart. The sides keep their bounds: early from hour 0 to before hour 3, late after hour 48. The text above stays as written at A1a.

I recomputed the onset from every concept's hour in the store. The concepts were read through mem.py codes by out/_analysis/a1_codes_dump.py. Two rooms have a coded turn before hour 0, one turn each:

• r/italy: one turn at h-1.14. Its onset is now h0.15, so it moves from neither side to the early side.
• r/yogscast: one turn at h-18.58, the offer of streaming keys (yogscast/c0024). Its onset is now h5.03. It stays on neither side.

No other room moves. The quartiles of the onset are unchanged: q1 3.76, median 9.51, q3 24.82.

Sizes on the new rule:

• Early: 132 rooms (131 above, with italy). The median items_in_window is 5149.
• Late: 61 rooms, unchanged. The median items_in_window is 33.
• Neither: 512 rooms.
• Held size (items_in_window 156 to 2770): 41 early and 12 late, unchanged, because r/italy lies outside the band.

Handback, stage B4: adjudication, and transmission after revision

Written at B4c, 2026-10-13. The reports are adjudication_report.md (the seven packets of rulings), transmission-B4.md (transmission decomposed, section 3), transmission-after-revision-B4.md (the blind sample) and coder_conflicts.jsonl (72 conflicts). The record of every step is notes-B4.md. The placements final are assign_final.jsonl.

What these figures license. The readers share an architecture with me, so every agreement and transmission figure here bounds whether the written instrument decides, not whether it is right.

The claim

The scheme decides G14, space and help between rooms, worst. On fresh readers against the settled line, G14 is among the three worst families for both arms in both strata. The figures are 0.507 and 0.310 in the uniform stratum and 0.423 and 0.385 in the adjudicated one. At stage B3 it was a middling family (0.697). Its themes turn on who asked whom for what: a border settled (T3-010), help sent (T3-011), space asked of a host (T3-035), help asked of a room (T3-084), a host's approval disputed or given (T3-094, T3-162). Their neighbours in G13 and G15 turn on the same questions (T3-039, T3-149, T3-150, T3-151). One exchange between rooms usually holds several of these acts at once, so readers count the same concepts under different siblings.

• The item that best supports it: warframe t11. Four fresh readings give three different primaries: T3-010, T3-094 and T3-162. GreenLattice's permission, its no-build zone and a member's "The people who made /r/GreenLattice have no authority" each meet a different G14 gate. Here the readers disagree with each other, not only with my line.
• The item that most threatens it: witcher t05. It is a G14 item on which the fleet and all four fresh readings agree (T3-010). Its low score comes only from the B1 themes the class 2 rule kept in the settled line (T3-046, T3-050).
• The condition that separates them is whether one room asks another for something: space, help or approval. Where it does, the siblings split. Where the item is a border talked over with no request, readers agree, and only how the settled line was built lowers the figure. The adjudicated stratum holds no class 2 item, and G14 is still second worst there for both arms, so the claim does not rest on class 2.

The placements final

assign_final.jsonl, sha256 d3506a88…, holds 7,844 lines, one per second-order theme of the analysed set, with nothing pending.

• Classes 1 (2,566) and 2 (1,990) stand from the fleet; class 2 keeps my B1 grouping, tagged b1_grouping_kept.
• Classes 3, 4 and 5 (3,288) carry their rulings.
• The blind sample's check revised no ruling.

The counts

• Contested items inherited and adjudicated: 3,288 of 3,288 (class 3 2,393, class 4 837, class 5 58), in seven packets.
• Rulings by taxonomy: genuine-joint 1,651, author-error 571, scheme-ambiguous 451, item-is-a-bag 255, author-disagrees 208, reader-error 152.
• author-error and author-disagrees: 571 and 208.
• The three themes with the most scheme-ambiguous rulings: T3-017 (55), T3-033 (34), T3-001 (32).
• The field that failed most: must_show, 252 of 451; then discriminators 114, must_not_show 57, decide_when_both 28.
• named_neither and unresolved: 757 (23.0%) and 185 (5.6%).
• Boundaries ruled once: 64 sibling pairs, deciding 817 items. The largest are T3-005|T3-021 (90 items), T3-010|T3-149 (62), T3-009|T3-043 (62) and T3-017|T3-031 (39). Each has its paragraph in boundaries.md and its item list in adjudication_report.md.
• Whether the pilot's predictions held: 17 of the 19 pairs of confusions.md split readers at least once; pairs 17 (T3-044|T3-082) and 18 (T3-014|T3-152) never did. B2 missed G20's pairs with T3-031 and G21's with T3-073 and T3-117.
• The four transmission rows (transmission-B4.md; gold items, then pilot items): the scheme decides 21 and 30; fails to transmit 1 and 0; the instrument does not decide this item 6 and 12; teaches something unintended 12 and 8.

Transmission after revision

The definition is stage B2's: Jaccard on placement sets, alpha with distance 1 − Jaccard and chance over the pooled sets, primary match beside it, pass 1 only. A reading whose settled line is unresolved leaves the denominator.

The arms. Arm 1 is DeepSeek V4.1 Flash at medium effort, the fleet's model and stage B2's. Arm 2 is OpenAI gpt-6-astra at medium effort under Codex's built-in instruction. They are reported apart and never pooled.

The next table gives the two figures per arm and stratum, with the stability floor and stage B3 beside them.

• Against the floor. The stability floor is 0.807 and B3's corpus agreement is 0.786. Arm 1's readers agree with each other in the uniform stratum exactly as the fleet did on the same items, inside the floor. They reach the settled line less often than they reach each other.
• Where the line comes from matters. Fresh DeepSeek readers reach the line in 0.930 of class 1 (fleet agreed, equal to my B1) and in 0.491 of class 2, where the line keeps my B1 grouping. Without class 2 the uniform figure is 0.703. Stage B2's gold figure (0.624, same model) is the lower, so the hard set was harder, by a small margin.
• Arm 2's agreement is an upper bound. Its two replications read byte-identical messages, and on the 18 items read twice they agree within a packet (0.889, 0.861) far more than across packets (0.653).
• The three worst families on fresh against settled (10 items or more): arm 1 uniform G14, G07, G08; arm 1 adjudicated G10, G14, G02; arm 2 uniform G14, G07, G08; arm 2 adjudicated G07, G14, G04.
• Stratum R (all 185 unresolved items) has no settled line. Fresh DeepSeek readers agree with each other at 0.623 there (the fleet 0.543), and most land on a placement someone already made, which does not resolve the items. 104 and 134 of 370 readings fall wholly outside every earlier placement.

The unanimous items a fresh reader placed elsewhere: 79 in either arm (62 in arm 1, 74 in arm 2), each named with a paragraph in transmission-after-revision-B4.md. The verdicts:

• the fleet's shared assumption 25;
• the settled line keeps my B1 themes 22;
• rule 0 applied differently 24;
• the scheme does not decide 6;
• the fresh reading misses a field 2.

In most of the 25, the fleet's two readers counted concepts under a theme whose own must_not_show or discriminator names a sibling. Examples are defence calls under T3-002 and a homeland flag under T3-002 or T3-038. Two readers agreeing is not the scheme deciding, and classes 1 and 2 stood without adjudication.

For stage C1

• The boundary I most expect stage C1 to have to move: T3-017|T3-031, the canvas condition. T3-017's discriminator lets a room's in-joke be T3-031 when carried "into the canvas talk or the day", while T3-031's must_show and discriminator require the canvas. It was ruled once over 39 items and failed 47 rulings, the most of any sentence. Fresh readers split on it again (danganronpa t01, metroid t16).
• The homeland flag. Fresh readers placed T3-065 where the fleet placed T3-002 or T3-038, in AmericanFlaginPlace t03, FaroeIslands t01 and wales t02. T3-002's must_not_show sends the flag to T3-065, but the other siblings' must_not_show lines do not.
• G14's request siblings, as in the claim above.
• The class 2 settled line. It keeps B1 themes placed under the B1 scheme. In the sample, 22 of 53 such items keep themes no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed.
• Sources. transmission-B4.md and transmission-after-revision-B4.md are among stage C1's sources. The per-theme agreement C1 needs is stage B3's (out/_analysis/b3_check_record.json).

The licences exercised

• FLEET.md's licence on every figure: it bounds whether the written instrument decides, not whether it is right.
• J's rulings. 500 items, 250 uniform and 250 adjudicated; the OpenAI arm, reported apart; stratum R holding all 185 unresolved items, its 18 that are also in U or A read twice.
• My choices under J's latitude. The three-concept floor for a lone B1 theme in class 4 (J: "whatever the agent feels more comfortable with"); the strata drawn disjoint; class 2 reported on its own row, with a second figure against its placed themes; one reading refused under the declared assembly rule; the fixed verdict test for the 79 paragraphs.

Notes, stage B4: adjudication

Opened at B4a-01, 2026-10-12. The PI's leg message (21:19Z) carries J's rulings of 12 October: the contested inventory is out/b3_classes.jsonl from tools/assemble.py. Classes 1 and 2 stand; classes 3, 4 and 5 go to adjudication, with the gloss-only reads that section 1 keeps whatever the class. The blind sample at B4b adds a third reader per item from an OpenAI model, as a separate arm reported apart. Figures before any ruling come from out/_analysis/b4_prepare.py (b4_prepare.json).

The gold drop (section 2)

• Dropped. All 755 seeded gold placements, told apart by (item, agent, replicate) on batches-B3.jsonl's gold tags. All 755 gold lines in assign_raw.jsonl sit on those keys. The 1,210 duplicates' second copies are dropped as well; they are no corpus reading.
• What assign_final.jsonl reads. Only the corpus copies, as b3_classes.jsonl does: 15,688 lines, two per item. No line of assign_final.jsonl carries an agent or a replicate.
• Count. The drop removes placements, not themes. assign_final.jsonl holds one line for each of the 7,844 items, which is counts.py's assignment_items_expected.
• Fidelity on the gold placements is stage B3's figure, read and not recomputed: 0.645 against the gold key, primary match 0.816 (fidelity-B3.md).

The selection (section 1, J 2026-10-12)

The next table gives the classes from b3_classes.jsonl.

• The gloss-only reads. The 18 placements into a family neither reader opened all fall in class 3, so the contested inventory is 3,288 items.
• Class 3. 1,140 items share a primary and differ on an added theme or the order. 1,253 differ on the primary.
• Class 4. In 692 of 837 items the readers' list shares no theme with my B1 grouping.
• Class 5. In 42 of 58 items the two readers agree.

The packets (sections 5 and 7)

I expect to rule on 3,288 items in seven packets of at most 500, one packet a leg. Packet 1 takes the 18 gloss-only items first. After that, every packet runs by the family of the first reading's primary, then by the pair of primaries. A family that does not fit runs on into the next packet.

The next table lists the packets.

The ruling policy, declared before the first item (section 5)

• A reader's confidence and why. Neither is a prior. A "clear" reading against an "arguable" one counts for nothing in the ruling. A reader's why points at material, and I check what it points at against the item's concepts. The ruling rests on the concepts read against the scheme's must_show, must_not_show, decide_when_both and discriminators.
• My B1 grouping is shown as the third placement. This is J's three-placement design. It is labelled as mine, and I weigh it like a reading, not as a prior.
• A theme neither reader chose. A ruling may name one, logged loudly: named_neither true, and the why says what both readers missed that the file does say. From item 401 of packet 4 this is replaced by J's rulings of 13 October: a ruling chooses among the readers' placements and my B1 grouping and adds no theme beyond them (see "Packet 4" below).
• When the scheme does not decide. The ruling is empty and unresolved true. The quote is the sentence of the scheme that failed to decide. The item is carried, not resolved by preference.
• Boundaries ruled once. Where five or more items of a packet split their primaries on one sibling pair, I rule the boundary once. It gets one paragraph in adjudication_report.md, quoting the discriminator, logged as one ruling with its item list. It is then applied to each item, and each item carries boundary_ruling.
• The taxonomy by class.
  • Class 3: by the readers' split, with the five values of section 7.
  • Class 4: the readers agree outside my B1 grouping. If the ruling takes the readers' list, the error was mine at B1: author-error. If it keeps a B1 theme both readers left out, it overrules them: author-disagrees. item-is-a-bag or genuine-joint apply where the material says so.
  • Class 5: I left the item unplaced at B1. If the readers' placement holds, my leaving it out was wrong: author-error. If the item holds no doing to place, the ruling is empty and unresolved true, with author-disagrees where both readers agreed. A split is ruled by the split.
• reader-error is suspected last. It is never given where both readers made the same miss.
• Concepts behind each theme placed. support_by_theme is taken from the reader line that placed the theme: its support, or its multiplacement record's support_additional for an added theme. Each is checked against the item. Where neither reader placed a theme, I name the concepts. A bag keeps its unplaced themes under also_present, each with its concepts.
• The quote. It is the deciding participant's words, a substring of the concept's text in the store, which is the rule cite.py resolves. A scheme-ambiguous ruling quotes the scheme sentence of the field that failed instead. No ruling cites a room note.

Blindness (section 6)

No v38 tool strips the packets, so a script does it: out/_analysis/b4_adjudication_packets.py.

• Stripped: agent, batch, replicate, position and timestamps, and the dispatch's reader id.
• The two readings are shown as reading A and reading B, in an order seeded by 20261016 per item, so the replicate cannot be read off the order. Each keeps its set, confidence, why, read, families_opened, bag and also_present.
• The item's material is rendered from the store as mem.py theme gives it: the label, the coder's theme_note, and each concept with its id, label and the participant's words. The member name, hour and thread columns are dropped; no ruling needs them.

The conflicts pass (section 4), declared

The pass runs over the coders' theme_note alone, with no concepts beneath it, across rooms. It runs packet by packet: before a packet's first ruling, I read that packet's notes grouped by the readings' primaries. coder_conflicts.jsonl grows with each packet and is whole when the last packet is ruled. Why packet by packet: a single pass over all 3,288 contested notes before any ruling would fill a leg on its own, and a conflict is wanted beside the disagreements it explains.

assign_final.jsonl while the packets run

It is rewritten at every adjudication leg by out/_analysis/b4_assign_final.py and holds every item of the analysed set:

• Classes 1 and 2: b3_classes.jsonl's placement, with class 2 tagged source: "b1_grouping_kept".
• A ruled item: the ruling.
• A contested item not yet ruled: third_order empty and status: "pending_adjudication", with the readers' confidence, so no line claims a placement before its ruling.

Packet 1, ruled at B4a-01 (2026-10-12)

All 491 items are ruled, in 20 blind chunks of 25 (out/_adjudication-B4/packet-01/rulings-NN.jsonl, appended by out/_analysis/b4_rule_append.py). out/_adjudication-B4/packet-01/summary.md holds the figures, and adjudication_report.md holds them as the interim report after packet 1 of 7. In brief:

• Taxonomy: genuine-joint 137, scheme-ambiguous 123, author-error 97, reader-error 77, author-disagrees 37, item-is-a-bag 20.
• Counts: unresolved 52 (10.6%); named_neither 84 (17.1%).
• Fields that failed: must_show 78, discriminators 39, decide_when_both 4, must_not_show 2.
• Themes that failed most: T3-017 29, T3-023 27, T3-001 24.
• Agreement: before, reader against reader, 0.486 mean Jaccard; after, each reader against the ruling, 0.633. The figure after is not a reliability figure.
• Mapping: assign_final.jsonl was rewritten (class 1 2,566, class 2 1,990, ruled 491, pending 2,797).

What changed during the packet, and why:

• Two rulings corrected in place. formula1 t05 and elitedangerous t01 had used T3-063 for removals of posts that are not canvas posts, and T3-063's must_show begins "Canvas posts handled under the sub's standing rules". b4_rule_append.py gained a --replace mode. It rewrites the named items in place, marks each line revised with the UTC time, and keeps the old file as disagreements.superseded-20261012T221214Z.jsonl.
• Three gaps ruled the same way each time, written into boundaries.md:
  • April Fools play not posted as true (unresolved on T3-001's must_show);
  • another sub's April Fools change (unresolved on T3-023's must_show);
  • moderators applying standing rules to non-canvas posts (unresolved on T3-063's must_show, conflict CC-004).
• Paragraphs added to boundaries.md. The T3-032|T3-097 paragraph was extended for the overlap of "stop them or take them down" with "requests to switch back". Seven pairs met on fewer than five items gained short paragraphs.
• A practice to declare for the later packets: a second theme on one concept. It is added where a scheme rule says "a concept of its own": T3-023's rule for T3-097 and T3-100, and T3-017's three-concept rule. Elsewhere a second theme on one or two concepts was added only where the concept plainly passes another theme's gate. Where it was not added, the concept is named in the ruling's why. Single-concept additions were not perfectly even across the packet (magictcg t09's megathread concept was left out); the report says so.
• The reader-error count. Of 77, 16 fell in chunk 18, single-concept G02 items. Two there were changed to scheme-ambiguous before writing (tagpro t15, twitch t04), because the readers had matched a test's literal words and that test does not state its canvas condition.
• Class 4. I took the readers' list in 89 items and kept a B1 theme in 29. My commonest B1 errors are listed in the report.

The next packet is packet 2: 447 items, G03 to G06, chunks built in out/_adjudication-B4/packet-02/. The conflicts pass runs over its notes before its first ruling, as declared.

validate.py B4, after packet 1:

stage B4:
  leg: adjudication
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 491: {'genuine-joint': 137, 'scheme-ambiguous': 123, 'reader-error': 77, 'author-error': 97, 'author-disagrees': 37, 'item-is-a-bag': 20}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 491, outstanding 2797
  coder conflicts 8

warn   RETURN-B4.md is not yet written; the build leg owes it, and this leg was read as an adjudication leg because neither RETURN-B4.md, a stage-B4 manifest entry nor _packets-B4/ exists

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 1 warnings

Packet 2, ruled at B4a-02 (2026-10-12 to 13)

Before the first item:

• The conflicts pass read packet 2's notes alone, grouped by the readings' primaries, and added CC-009 to CC-016 to coder_conflicts.jsonl (16 lines now).
• Seven boundaries were ruled once in boundaries.md ("Packet 2"): every pair on which five or more items split their primaries (out/_analysis/b4_packet_pairs.py). Four are T3-002 against a sibling, so each paragraph says how a concept is counted toward one act or the other.

All 447 items are ruled, in 18 blind chunks of 25 (out/_adjudication-B4/packet-02/rulings-NN.jsonl). packet-02/summary.md holds the figures, and adjudication_report.md holds them with packet 1's as the interim report. In brief:

• Taxonomy: genuine-joint 215, author-disagrees 65, scheme-ambiguous 62, author-error 58, item-is-a-bag 44, reader-error 3.
• Counts: unresolved 10 (2.2%); named_neither 155 (34.7%), of which 98 add only themes from my B1 grouping.
• Fields that failed: must_show 33, discriminators 17, must_not_show 6, decide_when_both 6.
• Themes that failed most: T3-002 12, T3-033 9, T3-014 6.
• Agreement: before, reader against reader, 0.537 mean Jaccard; after, each reader against the ruling, 0.603. The figure after is not a reliability figure.
• Mapping: assign_final.jsonl was rewritten (class 1 2,566, class 2 1,990, ruled 938, pending 2,350).

What changed during the packet, and why:

• The T3-016 correction (at item 146). The T3-002|T3-070 paragraph had said that teaching a newcomer to place counts as directions. T3-016's must_show names "how to pick a colour and place". The paragraph now reads that such teaching is not a call, and is T3-016 when it explains the event. bindingofisaac t02 was revised by --replace (revisions-01.jsonl).
• The T3-033 and T3-041 reading (from item 140). T3-041's must_not_show gives "The room's first mark proposed" to T3-033. Proposals of a further piece beside a standing mark are T3-041, scheme-ambiguous on T3-033's must_show. clashroyale t02, ruled before the reading, was revised (revisions-02.jsonl). I checked the T3-033 concepts of the 22 other packet 2 rulings that place T3-033 with out/_analysis/b4_theme_support_lines.py; each proposes a first mark.
• Class 4 went the other way. In packet 1 I took the readers' list in 89 class 4 items and kept a B1 theme in 29. In packet 2 the figures are 53 and 63. Of packet 2's 65 author-disagrees, 39 keep the readers' theme and add mine under rule 0. The report says I cannot separate this from my pull toward my own grouping.
• A batching slip, twice. I put an Edit and the dry run that depends on it in one turn (revisions-01 and the chunk 12 fix). Both ran in order. I kept them apart from then on.

Readings applied in packet 2, to carry into the later packets (each from the theme's own sentences):

• The counting rule for T3-002, T3-033 and T3-038. Calls, volunteers and answers ("I'm in", "on it") count toward T3-002; placing and reports of the work's state, with coordinates of the work in progress, toward T3-038; a new mark named, even with a call for help, toward T3-033.
• T3-065 takes the flag of the room's land, its calls and its proportions included (T3-002's must_not_show). T3-169 takes the sub's name written; T3-044 instead when bringing visitors in is the stated point.
• T3-084 takes a request received from another room and another canvas group asked as a group; T3-062 takes calls posted to other communities. "Canvas group" is undefined: scheme-ambiguous.
• T3-074 needs the limit, the cooldown or a placing trouble while building. A member's exams, papers or sleep are not in its test (pakistan t10 scheme-ambiguous; rutgers t13 author-disagrees). With nothing built yet, doubt about the hands goes to T3-136, and a design scaled down to the hands to T3-069.
• Smaller readings:
  • T3-137 for following an outside sub's plan; T3-068 for another room's mark altered into the room's sign or joke;
  • T3-170 for friendly work mistaken for vandalism; T3-196 for former fans returning; T3-122 for greetings to or from neighbours;
  • T3-118 needs a loss; T3-125 for "we just wing it"; T3-141 for night shifts; T3-162 for vetting others' requests to build;
  • T3-116 for plans hidden from rivals; T3-111 for a canvas sub's future.

National, political and hate content is named in the whys as the words give it. Examples: "schleus de merde", an anti-German slur, in france t05; "until we reach the jews" in russia t04; the anarcho-capitalist and anarcho-communist flags in anarcho_capitalism t06; "Norwegian commie bastards" in texas t10.

The next packet is packet 3: 500 items, G07 and the first 254 of G08. Its conflicts pass runs over its notes before its first ruling.

validate.py B4, after packet 2:

stage B4:
  leg: adjudication
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 938: {'genuine-joint': 352, 'scheme-ambiguous': 185, 'reader-error': 80, 'author-error': 155, 'author-disagrees': 102, 'item-is-a-bag': 64}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 938, outstanding 2350
  coder conflicts 16

warn   RETURN-B4.md is not yet written; the build leg owes it, and this leg was read as an adjudication leg because neither RETURN-B4.md, a stage-B4 manifest entry nor _packets-B4/ exists

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 1 warnings

Packet 3, ruled at B4a-03 (2026-10-13)

Before the first item:

• The conflicts pass read packet 3's notes alone and added CC-017 to CC-025 to coder_conflicts.jsonl (25 lines now).
• Nine boundaries were ruled once in boundaries.md ("Packet 3"): every new pair on which five or more items split their primaries. Three pairs from packet 2 carry over as written: T3-002|T3-033, T3-002|T3-038 and T3-004|T3-070.

All 500 items are ruled, in 20 blind chunks of 25 (out/_adjudication-B4/packet-03/rulings-NN.jsonl). packet-03/summary.md holds the figures, and adjudication_report.md holds them with packets 1 and 2 as the interim report. In brief:

• Taxonomy: genuine-joint 231, scheme-ambiguous 106, item-is-a-bag 76, author-error 45, author-disagrees 39, reader-error 3.
• Counts: unresolved 7 (1.4%); named_neither 280 (56.0%), of which 123 add only themes from my B1 grouping and 157 add a theme no placement held (out/_analysis/b4_named_neither_split.py).
• Fields that failed: must_show 54, must_not_show 26, discriminators 23, decide_when_both 3. 24 of the 26 must_not_show failures are the homeland flag or its emblems.
• Themes that failed most: T3-004 25, T3-033 25, T3-038 11.
• Agreement: before, reader against reader, 0.475 mean Jaccard and 0.598 primary match; after, each reader against the ruling, 0.473 and 0.535. The figure after fell below the figure before, the first packet where it did. It is not a reliability figure.
• Mapping: assign_final.jsonl was rewritten (class 1 2,566, class 2 1,990, ruled 1,438, pending 1,850).

What changed during the packet, and why:

• Three readings, each written in boundaries.md where it was first met: the homeland flag's look (from item 16), a design cut down to the hands (from item 12) and a celebration while placement goes on (from item 280). catalonia t07 and packet 2's sadboys t03 were revised to match. The chunk 12 draft first read T3-009 against T3-026 by their must_not_show timing; T3-026's decide_when_both already decides the pair, so six draft lines were changed before the write.
• T3-170 for members' own misclicks (from item 430). Its must_show names "members' own misclicks or misplaced pixels owned and forgiven". bisexual t04 and kpop t05 were revised to place it (revisions-02.jsonl).
• The append tool's support convention. b4_rule_append.py (lines 131 to 145) lets the primary give up the concepts it shares with added themes where it keeps others. It does not resolve overlaps among added themes, and it refuses a placed theme only when its list equals another's. The new read-only check out/_analysis/b4_own_support_check.py [--leg B4a-03] lists placed themes whose concepts all sit under the ruling's other themes. It found seven (ManningPlace t05, KState t04, rainbowgrid t01, dofus t01, skyrim t03 and teamcube t04, and packet 1's nerf t08). All were rewritten by --replace (packet-03/revisions-03.jsonl, packet-01/revisions-01.jsonl). The check finds none over the three packets, and I ran it after every later chunk.
• Boundary tags. Eleven packet 3 rulings applied packet 2's counting rule but carried no boundary_ruling. The tags were added with the rulings unchanged (revisions-04.jsonl, built by the new out/_analysis/b4_br_tag_draft.py); a row comparison against the superseded ledger shows only the tag, the revised stamp and the why changed.
• A log correction. The chunk 13 line said the readers' list was taken in "11 of 17" class 4 items. The chunk holds 16 class 4 and 3 class 5 items, and a correction line says 11 of 19.
• QB4-001 asked. Two sources lowered agreement. In 76 items both readers put T3-038 first, and my rulings kept it first in 27. 201 of 500 rulings place three themes, often with a one- or two-concept theme no placement held. I asked J whether packets 4 to 7 should keep adding such themes. Meanwhile packets 4 to 7 are ruled as packets 1 to 3 were.

Readings applied in packet 3, to carry into the later packets:

• The homeland flag. The flag of the room's land, its build, size, expansion, proportions, spot, repair and calls for hands, is T3-065. Emblems in or beside it are T3-113. A reader's T3-004, T3-020 or T3-041 on that work is scheme-ambiguous on that theme's must_not_show.
• Borders and help. A border with no protection stated is T3-004, scheme-ambiguous on T3-055's must_show. "Defend" with no attacker named is T3-002. Refresh advice is T3-070. Requests received are T3-084. Permission asked of a host is T3-035, and the host's grant T3-012. Relying on a bigger room's protection is T3-099.
• Smaller readings:
  • T3-170 for members' own misclicks owned and forgiven; T3-171 for a colour or pattern faction spreading (EraseThePlace, the ss13 greytide);
  • T3-068 for converting another's mark; T3-061 for taking a neighbour's space; T3-081 for "Campaña al desierto"; T3-130 for national politics (Brexit, imam hatip, Hayır, "Zuma Must Fall");
  • a known mark located for a member is T3-026; a mark the room did not know of is T3-082 (CC-021);
  • "I added a little something for my bias", T3-092's own example, goes to T3-060 by T3-092's discriminator (bangtan t10, scheme-ambiguous).
• Rule 0 as applied. At most three placements. Order by concept count; ties go by how many of the three placements (reader A, reader B, my B1) hold the theme. A one- or two-concept theme is added when it passes its gate; where several tie with no placement ahead, none is added. Each placed theme has a concept of its own.

National, political, hate, sexual and drug content is named in the whys as the words give it. Examples: "LULA PRESO AMANHÃ" in brasil t02 and "LULA PRESO AMANHA" in brasil t04; "some fake nigga kept replacing my work" in drugs t01; Hitler moustaches kept off Kekkonen in suomi t07; a Menorah "less prone to being plastered by swastikas" in israel t01; "Thin Blue Line" in AmericanFlaginPlace t10; "based Pinochet snek" in physical_removal t02; "dirty limies" in detroitredwings t03; "yiff me daddy /r/furry" in furry t01.

The next packet is packet 4: 461 items, the last 6 of G08 and G09 to G11. Its conflicts pass runs over its notes before its first ruling.

validate.py B4, after packet 3:

stage B4:
  leg: adjudication
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 1438: {'genuine-joint': 583, 'scheme-ambiguous': 291, 'reader-error': 83, 'author-error': 200, 'author-disagrees': 141, 'item-is-a-bag': 140}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 1438, outstanding 1850
  coder conflicts 25

warn   RETURN-B4.md is not yet written; the build leg owes it, and this leg was read as an adjudication leg because neither RETURN-B4.md, a stage-B4 manifest entry nor _packets-B4/ exists

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 1 warnings

Packet 4, ruled at B4a-04 (2026-10-13)

Before the first item:

• The conflicts pass read packet 4's notes alone and added CC-026 to CC-036 to coder_conflicts.jsonl (36 lines now).
• Four boundaries were ruled once in boundaries.md ("Packet 4"): T3-005|T3-021 (B2's predicted pair 1), T3-021|T3-038, T3-005|T3-038 and T3-005|T3-073.

All 461 items are ruled, in 19 blind chunks (out/_adjudication-B4/packet-04/rulings-NN.jsonl). packet-04/summary.md holds the figures, and adjudication_report.md holds them with packets 1 to 3 as the interim report. In brief:

• Taxonomy: genuine-joint 219, scheme-ambiguous 84, author-error 75, item-is-a-bag 53, author-disagrees 17, reader-error 13.
• Counts: unresolved 10 (2.2%); named_neither 222 (48.2%), of which 89 add only themes from my B1 grouping and 133 add a theme no placement held, all 133 in items 1 to 400.
• Fields that failed: must_show 39, must_not_show 32, decide_when_both 11, discriminators 2. 20 of the 32 must_not_show failures are the homeland flag's repair on T3-021's must_not_show.
• Themes that failed most: T3-021 24, T3-005 10, T3-073 9, T3-027 7.
• Agreement: before, reader against reader, 0.519 mean Jaccard and 0.675 primary match; after, each reader against the ruling, 0.562 and 0.671. Not a reliability figure.
• Mapping: assign_final.jsonl was rewritten (class 1 2,566, class 2 1,990, ruled 1,899, pending 1,389).

What changed during the packet, and why:

• QB4-001 answered, and the ruling rule changed at item 401. J (06:43 Berlin): "Ask it to stop. The point is to try to adjudicate." J's rulings (06:47 Berlin), for the rest of packet 4: a ruling chooses among the readers' placements and my B1 grouping and adds no theme beyond them; it takes the union of placements only when it names, for each theme it keeps, the separate concept that carries it; otherwise it chooses. Chunk 17 had been read under the old practice; it was re-decided under the new rule before any line was written. Items 1 to 400 of packet 4, and packets 1 to 3, are re-ruled at the start of B4a-05, not now.
• What the new rule did. out/_analysis/b4_agreement_range.py (new, read-only) splits packet 4. Items 1 to 400: before 0.512 and 0.652, after 0.536 and 0.638, three themes placed in 179, a theme no placement held in 133. Items 401 to 461: before 0.566 and 0.820, after 0.726 and 0.883, three themes placed in 22, none beyond the placements. The two parts hold different families (G08 to G10 against G11), so the rise is not the rule's effect alone.
• Rule 0 under the new rule. Concepts count only toward placed themes; a concept whose act no placement holds is named in the why and left out of support_by_theme. Order by concept count, ties by how many of the three placements hold the theme. A one- or two-concept theme that a placement holds is kept when its concept passes the theme's gate and it leads its level on placements; where placed themes tie at a level, none is kept. A bag still names its other themes under also_present, which places nothing; bakchodi t09 lists T3-006, which no reading named.
• Seven boundaries in packet 4's own families. Beside the four ruled first: T3-020|T3-022 (from item 189; CC-033), and from item 401 T3-027|T3-028, T3-027|T3-087 and T3-089|T3-168. Two readings: the homeland flag kept and defended (from item 15) and a call to fight against a call to defend (from item 16).
• One correction. MonkeyIsland t03, ruled unresolved in chunk 6 on a full T3-005|T3-021 tie, was revised to place both themes, as the T3-005|T3-021 paragraph rules for a full tie (packet-04/revisions-01.jsonl).
• Slips. In chunk 5 a draft's write and its dry run went in one turn. They ran in order, and the later chunks kept them apart. After the compaction in chunk 16, the chunk 16 draft was written before the head was re-read and the reconciliation line logged. I then read the head and stage file, logged the line, checked the draft against the chunk file and fixed three whys before its dry run.

Readings applied in packet 4, to carry into the later packets:

• The homeland flag kept and defended: repair, calls for hands and its spot are T3-065; an attack on it, fought or raised as an alarm, T3-005; watching it T3-021; night watch T3-141.
• Fights and calls. A call to fight is T3-005; a call to defend or protect with no attack in the words is T3-002. A report with a call is T3-005; a report without one is T3-073.
• Culprits. Members doubting a damage was the room's own are tracing it (T3-087); a bare denial pointing at another room is T3-087 by T3-188's must_not_show; an organised room setting its plan apart from rogue placers is T3-188; friendly work taken for an attack is T3-170. A loss blamed after the close is T3-058.
• Scripts. Scripts made, shared, fixed or run for the room's work are T3-028; scripts to wreck another room's work are not. Arguing their fairness is T3-027; the larger part leads. Glitches used to place more, and extra accounts with concepts of their own, are T3-088. Accounts handed to someone else's bot are T3-120. A script changed to spare a neighbour is T3-168; the room's own versions fighting its plan are T3-089.

National, political, hate and slur content is named in the whys as the words give it. Examples: "pokatoličeni Srbi", a slur for Croats, in serbia t08; "od srba i ostale gamadi", Serbs called vermin, in bih t02; "Too many Pajeets", a slur for Indians, in 4chan t08; "porkies" and "randian" in bakchodi t06 and t11; "Indians , being the cheats they are" and "Saffron terrorists" in pakistan t08; "changed it to fags", a homophobic slur on the Leafs logo, in sabres t09; "Shadilay my brothers. Kek wills it!" in pepe t04; Richard Spencer and /pol/ in completeanarchy t12.

The next packet is packet 5: 409 items, G12 to G14. B4a-05 opens by re-ruling packets 1 to 3 and items 1 to 400 of packet 4 under J's rulings, as J directs.

validate.py B4, after packet 4:

stage B4:
  leg: adjudication
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 1899: {'genuine-joint': 802, 'scheme-ambiguous': 375, 'reader-error': 96, 'author-error': 275, 'author-disagrees': 158, 'item-is-a-bag': 193}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 1899, outstanding 1389
  coder conflicts 36

warn   RETURN-B4.md is not yet written; the build leg owes it, and this leg was read as an adjudication leg because neither RETURN-B4.md, a stage-B4 manifest entry nor _packets-B4/ exists

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 1 warnings

The re-ruling of packets 1 to 4, at B4a-05 (2026-10-13)

The PI's message for B4a-05 carried J's rulings (06:45 and 06:47 Berlin): (1) the placements are the readers' and mine (B1), and a ruling chooses among them and adds no theme beyond them; (2) a ruling takes the union only when it names, for each theme it keeps, the separate concept that carries it, otherwise it chooses; (3) re-rule only the items in packets 1 to 4 whose ruling holds a theme no placement held, under (1) and (2), keep the superseded ledger, and do (3) before packet 5. QB4-001's answer was read with mem.py asks before the first write.

What was done:

• The work list. out/_analysis/b4_rerule_list.py (new, read-only) lists the rulings that hold a theme no placement held, with both readings blinded as A and B, my B1 grouping, the old ruling and each removed theme's concepts. Packet 1 30, packet 2 58, packet 3 157, packet 4 133: 378. Every other ruled line already named a concept of its own per placed theme, so rule (2) reached no other line.
• The decisions. One line per item in out/_adjudication-B4/rerule-B4a-05/decisions-NN.jsonl; out/_analysis/b4_rerule_draft.py (new) builds a draft from them and refuses a ruling theme no placement holds; b4_rule_append.py --replace wrote each draft after its dry run in a turn of its own. Thirteen parts: packet 1 one, packet 2 one, packet 3 four, packet 4 seven. Each kept the old ledger as disagreements.superseded-<time>.jsonl. b4_own_support_check.py found no theme without a concept of its own after any part. b4_rerule_list.py returns nothing for all four packets.
• The method is in the diary entry that opened the leg and in adjudication_report.md: a removed theme's concepts count toward a placed theme whose must_show takes them; rule 0 then runs inside the placements, so a placed theme the old limit of three cut may enter; unresolved where no placement's test takes the material.

What it changed:

• Taxonomy over the four packets: genuine-joint 825 (was 802), scheme-ambiguous 336 (375), author-error 292 (275), item-is-a-bag 186 (193), author-disagrees 162 (158), reader-error 98 (96). Unresolved 82 (79): weezer t13, nbaspurs t17 and rainbowgrid t06 were added, where no placement's test takes the material.
• named_neither fell from 741 to 484. Every one now keeps a theme from my B1 grouping; none holds a theme no placement held.
• Agreement after, each reader against the ruling: 0.627 mean Jaccard and 0.698 primary match over the four packets (was 0.565 and 0.649). Packet 3 rose from 0.473 to 0.581. Not a reliability figure.
• Readings replaced. The homeland-flag reading and the call-to-defend reading of packet 4, packet 2's T3-002|T3-005 paragraph and packet 3's T3-033|T3-041 paragraph now send a concept to their theme only where a placement holds it. Where none does, calls to defend count toward T3-005, the flag's repair toward T3-021, its look and spot toward the readers' T3-004 or T3-020, and a further piece toward the readers' T3-033, T3-038 or T3-004.
• Four earlier corrections undone: catalonia t07, sadboys t03, bisexual t04 and kpop t05 had been corrected to a theme no placement held.
• Bags. Several bags placed a theme no placement held; they were re-placed among the placements, and some stopped being bags (adventuretime t04, suomi t07, archlinux t04, israel t02, loliconsunite t02, placeDE t03).

What I doubt:

• Rule 0 inside the placements keeps more of my B1 than a choice would. A one- or two-concept B1 theme that leads its level is kept as a third theme. 89 of packet 4's 137 named_neither rulings place three themes. Rule (2) permits that union, since each kept theme has its own concept; it does not require it. I applied the rule declared at item 401 so that all four packets are ruled one way. If J reads "otherwise it chooses" as asking for fewer unions, the rule to change is the one-concept keep.
• Two labels do not match the rulings. 12 author-error rulings from packet 4's items 401 to 461 keep a B1 theme (by §7 author-disagrees), and 2 packet 2 author-disagrees rulings take the readers' list. Rule (3) does not reach them, so they stand and the report gives both counts.
• Where both must_show lines take a concept, I followed the reading that placed it, or the more specific test (a swastika alarm to T3-146, '24-7 supervision' to T3-141 by T3-021's must_not_show). These choices decide whether a one-concept theme survives.

Slips: two Edit calls on adjudication_report.md ran in one turn; both applied, and the later edits went one at a time.

National, political, hate and slur content named in the re-ruled whys as the words give it, for example: "pokatoličenim Srbima" (Catholicised Serbs, a slur for Croats) and the tricolour that vandals tried to make "Bulgarian or Arab" in serbia t08; "porkies" for Pakistanis and "Randia" for India in bakchodi t06; the swastika on the Pakistani flag and "To Bakchodi fuckers" in pakistan t05; the black Nazi symbol in the menorah in israel t02; "TheDonald users and KotakuInAction" miscolouring the trans flag in traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns t02; "franchutes" for the French in spain t09; the Moors and the Empire in PORTUGALCARALHO t02.

J's ruling on also_present, and the correction, at B4a-05 (2026-10-13)

The PI's message at 07:09 UTC carried J's ruling of 09:09 Berlin on bakchodi t09: rule (1) extends to also_present, which lists only themes that a reader or my B1 named; apply it to the rulings written from now on and to the ledger's existing entries, keeping the superseded ledger. I asked J whether a theme a reader listed under its own also_present counts as named (QB4-002). J's answer (09:20 Berlin): yes; also_present may list themes a reader placed, a reader listed under its own also_present, or my B1 named, nothing else; restore any entries the interim reading removed that this admits.

What was done:

• The scan. out/_analysis/b4_ap_scan.py (new, read-only; --reading placed|named, --ledger) found 128 lines in packets 1 to 4 (5, 32, 46, 45) listing 273 themes outside the named set. Dropped most: T3-002 29, T3-004 17, T3-041 16, T3-170 14, T3-073 14, T3-065 9, T3-070 8. 84 lines keep a theme only a reader's own also_present named, which QB4-002 admits.
• The correction. Four --replace parts from out/_adjudication-B4/rerule-ap-B4a-05/draft-apNN-named.jsonl; old ledgers disagreements.superseded-20261013T072151Z.jsonl, -072154Z, -072158Z, -072202Z. b4_rerule_draft.py now takes several decision files. out/_analysis/b4_ap_emptied_show.py (new, read-only) printed the four bags left with no theme at the floor; each was re-ruled by hand: archlinux t01 (genuine-joint), ireland t04 and starvstheforcesofevil t02 (author-disagrees), de t02 (author-error).
• The interim reading (placed themes only) ran as a dry run and removed nothing from the ledger, so nothing had to be restored.
• From packet 5 on, also_present lists only placed themes, and a bag needs four placed themes with three concepts each.

Packet 5, ruled at B4a-05 (2026-10-13)

Before the first item:

• The conflicts pass read packet 5's notes alone and added CC-037 to CC-048 to coder_conflicts.jsonl (48 lines now).
• Five boundaries were ruled once in boundaries.md ("Packet 5"): T3-010|T3-024, T3-010|T3-149, T3-006|T3-061, T3-010|T3-011 and T3-010|T3-151, each applied under J's rulings.

All 409 items are ruled, in 17 blind chunks (out/_adjudication-B4/packet-05/rulings-NN.jsonl). packet-05/summary.md holds the figures, and adjudication_report.md holds them with packets 1 to 4 as the interim report. In brief:

• Taxonomy: genuine-joint 291, author-disagrees 44, author-error 41, reader-error 16, scheme-ambiguous 14, item-is-a-bag 3.
• Counts: unresolved 3 (linux t03, survivor t26, PurplePixels t13); named_neither 131 (32.0%), every one from my B1 alone, none beyond the placements.
• Fields that failed: must_show 2, must_not_show 8, decide_when_both 0, discriminators 4. The one sentence that failed more than once is T3-006's discriminator against T3-061 (4).
• Agreement: before 0.467 mean Jaccard and 0.623 primary match; after 0.612 and 0.677. Not a reliability figure.
• Class 4: the readers' list taken in 42, a B1 theme kept in 44.
• Boundary tags: T3-010|T3-149 34, T3-010|T3-151 31, T3-010|T3-024 26, T3-006|T3-061 18, T3-010|T3-011 14. Chunks 6 and 7 and item 409 were tagged after the packet (nine --replace lines; old ledger disagreements.superseded-20261013T081847Z.jsonl).
• Mapping: assign_final.jsonl rewritten (class 1 2,566, class 2 1,990, ruled 2,308, pending 980). The summaries of packets 1 to 4 were rerun after the also_present correction.

Readings applied in packet 5, to carry into the later packets:

• Fights and deals. T3-010's "with no fight to end" fails for a concept naming a fight, a threat, peace or a truce, even where no placement holds T3-149. A shift agreed with no request in the words is T3-010; a move because a neighbour asked is T3-039 where placed.
• Help. A request for help is T3-084 by T3-011's must_not_show. Help counts toward T3-151 only when the return is named. T3-150's decide_when_both keeps help traded inside an alliance when defence or a fight is the frame. A member whose effort moves to another room's build is T3-137.
• Space. A request for space to the room that holds it is T3-035; a host ruling on many requests T3-162; a single grant T3-012; a warning that a faction covers unapproved art T3-094.
• Neighbours. T3-079 needs national flags; T3-149 rooms already in contact; T3-078 kin felt in the words; T3-099 the bigger room's protection and its size in the words; T3-071 adoption into a neighbour's work; T3-170 friendly work taken for vandalism.
• Rule 0 at the top. Where the top of the order ties on concepts and placements, all the tied themes are placed (Clannad t05, Fez t06, Dustforce t08, aceattorney t10, androidgaming t06). Themes of three concepts or more tied on placements at the limit of three are left out together.

What I doubt:

• My B1 kept against both readers. Rule 0 inside the placements keeps a one- or two-concept B1 theme alone at its level. In class 4 that turned the ruling toward my B1 in 44 of 86 items, 7 of 7 in chunk 7 and 8 of 9 in chunk 14. 89 of the 131 named_neither rulings place three themes. If J reads "otherwise it chooses" as asking for fewer unions, the rule to change is the one-concept keep.
• Requests for room inside a host's work. The T3-010|T3-024 paragraph counts "a request for room" toward T3-010. In theitalyplace t11 I left the requests for room inside Italy's flag out as T3-035's act, which no placement held, and counted only requests between neighbouring works toward T3-010. Counted the other way, T3-010 leads that item; the ruling's set is the same.
• Where both must_show lines take one concept, the choice can decide the item: england t05 ('No' with a flood complaint), falcons t15 ('Nope ... or you get nothing'). I counted a reply that answers a request toward T3-115 both times.

Slips:

• After the first compaction of the leg, rulings-06.jsonl was written before the head was re-read and the reconciliation line logged. I then logged the line and re-checked the draft (item 138).
• Three Edit calls on b4_ap_scan.py ran in one turn. All applied; later edits went one at a time.
• One diary line said I had asked J before mem.py ask ran; the ask followed at once.
• One diary line gave the dropped-theme counts from the placed reading; a later line corrected them from the superseded ledger.
• The chunk 14 dry run refused c0185 on hawks t06 (a concept of another theme); it was removed before the write.
• After the last compaction, chunk 16 was read before the head; the reconciliation line was logged before any write.

National, political, hate and slur content named in packet 5's whys as the words give it, for example: 'BURN THE DISGUSTING ANCRAP RAG!', the hammer and sickle and 'Yellow Hordes of Ancapistan' (TheFarLeftSide t05); a white-supremacist parody about purging 'the inferior colored people' (ssbpm t17); 'remove the Russian scourge' and 'generalgovernment' (czech t07); 'utrota dansken vid 16.00' (sweden t03); 'Manifest Destiny' (AmericanFlaginPlace t06); 'Pakistani's who want to vandalize' and 'homosuck' (india t04); 'la escoria de Chavez' (uruguay t04); 'argentinos nojentos' (portugal t11); a joke about Norwegian sailors and rapes (europe t10); 'BASH THE FASH' and the NKVD beside Rosa Luxemburg (fullcommunism t05); 'frog shagging bastards of the north' (malta t03); a red swastika planned on a logo (liquicity t07); r/Eagles' 'Nazi Flag', 'kill this Nazi scum' and 'anti semetic bullshit' (falcons t15); 'Purify the core' (theblackvoid t02).

The next packet is packet 6: 500 items, G15 to G19 and part of G20. Its conflicts pass runs first.

validate.py B4, after packet 5:

stage B4:
  leg: adjudication
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 2308: {'genuine-joint': 1117, 'scheme-ambiguous': 350, 'reader-error': 114, 'author-error': 334, 'author-disagrees': 208, 'item-is-a-bag': 185}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 2308, outstanding 980
  coder conflicts 48

warn   RETURN-B4.md is not yet written; the build leg owes it, and this leg was read as an adjudication leg because neither RETURN-B4.md, a stage-B4 manifest entry nor _packets-B4/ exists

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 1 warnings

Packet 6, ruled at B4a-06 (2026-10-13)

Before the first item:

• The conflicts pass read packet 6's notes alone and added CC-049 to CC-062 to coder_conflicts.jsonl (62 lines now). The two that explain most splits: CC-049 (the room's joking written as one practice whether about the canvas, the sub's April Fools change, its ordinary talk or a rival) and CC-052 (G15's truces, alliances, help and borders as one practice, as CC-037 in packet 5).
• Eight boundaries were ruled once in boundaries.md ("Packet 6"): T3-010|T3-149, T3-017|T3-031, T3-001|T3-031, T3-023|T3-031, T3-150|T3-151, T3-031|T3-050, T3-018|T3-031 and T3-018|T3-052, with T3-010|T3-151 carried from packet 5 and the pairs below five applied as met.
• QB4-003 asked during chunk 5: whether a theme a reader listed under its own also_present, and no placement holds, counts in the bag test. Meanwhile a bag needed four placed themes.

QB4-003, answered, and the revisit

J's answer (11:29 Berlin): "count them. Themes a reader listed under its own also_present count in the bag test. Apply it to packet 6 and to the 43 rulings in packets 1 to 5 that out/_analysis/b4_bag_named_check.py lists, keeping the superseded ledger." The test as applied from item 126 is written in boundaries.md ("The bag test after QB4-003"): the themes counted are the placed themes and the readers' own also_present themes; a named theme's concepts of its own are those its must_show takes that no placed theme in the ruling already holds; four themes with three concepts of their own make a bag; the bag places the largest act a placement holds; a placed theme with three concepts is never cut by the limit of three.

The revisit read 64 lines (43 in packets 1 to 5 and 21 in packet 6's items 1 to 125): 45 became bags and 19 were kept, where the readers' listed concepts did not hold three under the named theme's test. Four slips outside the list, where four placed themes with three concepts each had been cut at the limit, became bags: utaustin t05 and japan t05 (packet 6), loliconsunite t02 (packet 4) and lebanon t02 (packet 5). pcmasterrace t10 (packet 5), on the list, had also cut two placed themes at the limit. New tools: b4_bag_view.py (read-only; one item's readings, ledger line and named-only concepts) and b4_bag_draft.py (a bag re-rule draft from a short spec). Drafts and specs: out/_adjudication-B4/rerule-bag-B4a-06/. After packet 6, the check flagged seven packet 6 bags that could list one more named theme. Six hold two concepts or fewer under the test (de t11's T3-009, fivenightsatfreddys t08's T3-084, philippines t08's T3-072, turkey t06's T3-151, cfb t02's T3-150, frankocean t05's T3-084 and T3-011, EraseThePlace t06's T3-149). chibears t10 was a slip: reader A's T3-050 holds three, and it was re-ruled with T3-050 under also_present (spec-06-084.json; old ledger disagreements.superseded-20261013T111959Z.jsonl).

Carried open: 26 older bags in packets 1 to 5 could list more named themes; J named only the 43. The packet 4 item 197 also_present note carries unchanged.

J's answer on lone B1 themes, and the rule I chose

The PI relayed J's answer at 10:28Z (12:28 Berlin): "Whatever the agent feels more comfortable with. They can also adapt the code definition if needed". The options J saw: (1) leave it, my B1 a full placement; (2) a theme only my B1 placed beats two agreeing readers only with three or more concepts of its own; (3) when both readers agree their list stands and my B1 is a note.

I chose option (2) with a condition. In class 4, a theme only my B1 placed stands against the two agreeing readers only with three concepts or more of its own; with fewer it is left out and named in the why. The readers' list then stands where its test takes concepts; where my reading finds it takes none, the item is unresolved, and no one-concept theme of mine is put in its place. Class 3 is unchanged.

Why. Two independent readers agreeing is the case where my B1 carries the author's pull most. Three concepts is the scheme's own floor for a theme of its own. Option (3) would make the adjudication measure obedience and would force a readers' theme whose test takes nothing.

Earlier packets: b4_lone_b1_check.py (new, read-only) found 250 class 4 rulings in packets 1 to 6 keeping a lone B1 theme, 130 under three concepts. b4_lone_b1_draft.py (new) built the drafts in out/_adjudication-B4/rerule-loneb1-B4a-06/; six --replace parts, old ledgers disagreements.superseded-20261013T103259Z to -103319Z. 130 lines changed: packet 1 11, packet 2 29, packet 3 31, packet 4 20, packet 5 23, packet 6 16; author-error 83, author-disagrees 40, scheme-ambiguous 7; unresolved 30. After packet 6 the check finds 144 class 4 rulings keeping a lone B1 theme, every one with three concepts or more.

The figures

All 500 items are ruled, in 20 blind chunks (out/_adjudication-B4/packet-06/rulings-NN.jsonl). packet-06/summary.md holds the figures, and adjudication_report.md holds them with packets 1 to 5 as the interim report. In brief:

• Taxonomy: genuine-joint 256, author-error 83, scheme-ambiguous 71, author-disagrees 51, item-is-a-bag 20, reader-error 19.
• Counts: unresolved 49 (9.8%); named_neither 145 (29.0%), every one from my B1 alone, none beyond the placements.
• Fields that failed: must_show 31, must_not_show 8, decide_when_both 0, discriminators 32. The sentences that failed most: T3-017's discriminator against T3-031 (24) and T3-001's (8), both the canvas condition; T3-018's must_show (5); T3-052's must_show (4); T3-004's must_not_show (4, the homeland flag).
• Agreement: before 0.454 mean Jaccard and 0.510 primary match; after 0.600 and 0.595. Not a reliability figure. Items 1 to 316 (G15 to G19) 0.446 before, 0.593 after; items 317 to 500 (G20) 0.468 and 0.616.
• Class 4 (134): the readers' list taken in 87, a B1 theme kept in 32 (each with three concepts or more), unresolved 15.
• Boundary tags: T3-010|T3-149 28, T3-017|T3-031 24, T3-001|T3-031 9, T3-010|T3-151 6, T3-150|T3-151 5, T3-023|T3-031 5, T3-018|T3-052 5, T3-031|T3-050 4, T3-018|T3-031 1.
• Mapping: assign_final.jsonl rewritten (class 1 2,566, class 2 1,990, ruled 2,808, pending 480).
• Packets 1 to 6: 2,808 rulings; genuine-joint 1,348, author-error 482, scheme-ambiguous 421, item-is-a-bag 238, author-disagrees 186, reader-error 133; unresolved 161; named_neither 649; agreement before 0.489, after 0.642.

Readings applied in packet 6, to carry into packet 7

• G15 to G17. Deals as in packet 5. The homeland flag's calls, build, spot, size and repair count toward T3-065 where a placement holds it, and toward the placed T3-002, T3-004, T3-020, T3-021 or T3-038 where none does; national pictures beside it are T3-113; national feeling through the flag T3-145.
• G18. T3-086 is the community's own quarrel carried onto the canvas (Hello Internet's flag quarrel, halo t14's FixMCC, Bitcoin's scaling split, the Texans' FTC mark). T3-130 is national politics; T3-080 a political symbol argued over, partisan marks included; T3-081 a canvas fight told in a nation's real history of war or occupation, not war talk between fandoms (T3-135); T3-179 ideology argued from the canvas.
• G19. T3-050 is taunts at a rival community, even in the joke register; T3-142 jokes about a people; T3-143 a joke's limits argued; T3-182 bigotry in the room's own talk answered; T3-146 and T3-177 covering and calling for swastikas. T3-154 takes victory claimed or rivals called defeated; T3-050 mockery with no victory claimed; T3-155 a salute after the fight. T3-099 needs the bigger room's size in the words; T3-078 kinship in the words. Visitors' help counts toward T3-011; requests received toward T3-084.
• G20. The canvas condition: a joke with the canvas in the words is T3-031; with none, T3-017, and April Fools play with nothing posted as true goes to a placed T3-017 or is left out. T3-016 takes the event, its rules, the heat map and why subs make pictures. A glitch used to place more is T3-088, coped with T3-074, explained T3-016. A figure worked out with a reason or a correction is T3-018; a bare name for a neighbour's figure T3-052; a mock reading kept up as a joke T3-031. T3-105 keeps records; T3-057 remakes them as wallpapers, memes or copypasta. A bare title naming r/place shows no act.
• The level rule as applied. A theme alone at its level is kept, even after a theme with more concepts was dropped at a higher level for not leading it on placements (cmu t05 keeps T3-018 at one concept after T3-009 at two; russia t13 keeps T3-050 after a top tie).

What I doubt

• The three-concept floor is my choice. J let me choose. A theme of mine with exactly three concepts still overrides two agreeing readers (trees t07's stoner talk, T3-017; portugal t38's copypasta, T3-057). Class 3 still keeps my one-concept themes when they lead their level, which is most of packet 6's 145 named_neither.
• The level rule past a dropped theme. Keeping a one-concept theme alone at a lower level after a two-concept theme was dropped above it follows the rule's words, but it can keep a smaller act and drop a larger one.
• The words or the thread. I read the canvas condition from the concept's words. In bakchodi t19 I counted a correction of a bot's joke in a post about the canvas as canvas talk; in oneshot t11 and wholesomememes t23 I did not count side talk under a canvas post. The line is mine.
• What I knew and the words did not say. In serbia t04 I wrote "the 1999 war on the town's refinery" from 'Pančevo, proleće 1999' and 'gori rafinerija nafte'; the words give the date and the burning, not the war. In leagueoflegends t05 and kerbalspaceprogram t02 I read a sub change from the concepts' own words ('R/eEKapey+lKCV7UBLGIK7YMvL6gk=', 'the memeification', the banner). In 4chan t22 I did not take reader B's word that the board merger was the site's April Fools joke.
• T3-052 when the room has no mark. shitredditsays t03 placed T3-052 on a survey of the whole canvas; the test names pictures "around the room's mark".
• Unresolved rose to 49. Most are G20's bare titles and room jokes with no canvas in the words, as in packet 1. I did not push them to a placement.

Slips

• After a compaction, I read the chunk 13 file and fetched tests before re-reading the head and logging the reconciliation line; the line was logged before any write.
• A chunk 6 diary line conflated two items ('BASH ... filthy blue tiles' and purplecorner t02); a later line corrected it.
• The QB4-003 revisit was first logged as 63 lines read, 45 re-ruled and 18 kept; the chunk 7 log corrected it to 64, 45 and 19, with four slips outside the list.
• Five rulings had cut a fourth placed theme with three concepts at the limit of three, against the bag test; each was re-ruled as a bag (utaustin t05, japan t05, loliconsunite t02, lebanon t02, pcmasterrace t10). After packet 6, chibears t10 had left reader A's named T3-050 unweighed; re-ruled.
• The chunk 17 dry run refused item 423 for T3-130 with no concept; the draft was fixed before the append.
• The guard refused cut -c after a helper script once; the command was re-run without it. A word the guard refuses appeared once in a Bash command.
• Rewriting adjudication_report.md, I shortened the packet 1 to 5 boundary paragraphs and validate.py found 10 pairs with no paragraph; they were restored from the B4a-05 text. The last Edit to the report and the validator run that checked it went in one turn.

Content named

National, political, hate and slur content is named in packet 6's whys as the words give it, for example: 'Turkish scum DEUS VULT' and 'Mission remove kebab' (lithuania t09); 'REMOVE KEBAB' and 'CRUSADE against the infidel' (CKCrusaders t06); 'momo nigger chinky' and 'Designated Shitting Streets' (bakchodi t03); 'Porkistanis' and 'the paki flag is completely bhagwa now' (bakchodi t04); 'Islamic loving fucks' and 'burned by bhagwa' (bakchodi t18); 'dhotiwalas' and 'Katus' (pakistan t16); 'Hitler did nothing wrong' (texas t15) and 'Hitler hat nichts falsch gemacht' (kerbalspaceprogram t02); 'make the reich happen' (germany t05); 'Germany needs more lebensraum' (unitedkingdom t08); 'extra-jurisdictional excursions into Mexican living space' (ukplace t04); the 4chan flag 'basiert auf der Reichskriegsflagge', 'Operation Annexion' and 'Nacht und Nebel Aktion' (de t11); 'can we make France fascist?' (de t13); a Nazi flag and 'a huge racist flag' (eagles t15); the swastika petitions and calls (achievement_hunter t02, roosterteeth t11); 'heil harley' at a swastika (homestuck t12); 'white is right' and r/WhiteRights (EraseThePlace t08); 'jontron is a white supremacist' (h3h3productions t47); the call to put MH17 back on the Russian flag (thenetherlands t02); 'Hayır' above the Turkish flag (turkey t11); 'the fascist scourges' and the YPG and Rojava flags (kurdistan t04); 'teach WORST KOREA a lesson' (stlouisblues t03); 'greedy french people' (egypt t02); 'vastaškim moderatorima' (croatia t07); 'raça mestre feup' (portugal t38); 'solo nosotros italianos somos los ladrones' and Trump's wall (mexico t17); 'your going to elect a fascist' (france t11); the canvas called fit for Finns with autism (suomi t25); 'Faggot', 'Bullfags', 'Gay Unicorn' and the homophobic slur in costa_rica t10.

The next packet is packet 7: 480 items, the rest of G20 and G21. Its conflicts pass runs first.

validate.py B4, after packet 6:

stage B4:
  leg: adjudication
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 2808: {'genuine-joint': 1348, 'scheme-ambiguous': 421, 'reader-error': 133, 'author-error': 482, 'author-disagrees': 186, 'item-is-a-bag': 238}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 2808, outstanding 480
  coder conflicts 62

warn   RETURN-B4.md is not yet written; the build leg owes it, and this leg was read as an adjudication leg because neither RETURN-B4.md, a stage-B4 manifest entry nor _packets-B4/ exists

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 1 warnings

Packet 7, ruled at B4a-07 (2026-10-13)

The PI's message for this leg: rule packet 7 (480 items, the rest of G20 and G21), the last packet, conflicts pass first, under J's rulings (1) and (2), the also_present ruling of 09:09 Berlin, the answers to QB4-002 and QB4-003, and the lone-B1 rule I chose under J's answer of 12:28 Berlin. I read QB4-003's answer with mem.py asks before the first write. Every packet 7 item was ruled under all of these from its first ruling; nothing in the packet waited on an answer.

Before the first item:

• The conflicts pass read packet 7's notes alone and added CC-063 to CC-072 (72 lines now). The one that explains most splits is CC-063: the room's account of its finished work written as one practice (celebrating, crediting, thanking, saving, mourning, telling).
• Three boundaries were ruled once in boundaries.md ("Packet 7"): T3-009|T3-073 (B2's pair 9), T3-009|T3-043 (B2's pair 14) and T3-029|T3-073, with the pairs below five applied as met.

The figures

All 480 items are ruled, in 20 blind chunks (out/_adjudication-B4/packet-07/rulings-NN.jsonl), with two corrections (corrections-01.jsonl). packet-07/summary.md holds the figures, and adjudication_report.md is now the full report over the seven packets. In brief:

• Taxonomy: genuine-joint 303, author-error 89, scheme-ambiguous 30, author-disagrees 22, reader-error 19, item-is-a-bag 17.
• Counts: unresolved 24 (5.0%); named_neither 108 (22.5%), every one from my B1 alone, none beyond the placements; 77 of the 108 place three themes.
• Fields that failed: must_show 25, discriminators 4, must_not_show 1, decide_when_both 0. Most failed sentences do not say whose work, whose picture or which room's feeling they mean: T3-052's must_show 4, T3-009's 3, T3-164's 3, T3-037's, T3-111's and T3-117's 2 each.
• Agreement: before 0.500 mean Jaccard and 0.650 primary match; after 0.669 and 0.731. Not a reliability figure. Items 1 to 53 (the rest of G20) 0.544 before, 0.663 after; items 54 to 480 (G21) 0.495 and 0.670.
• Class 4 (118): the readers' list taken in 91 (3 bags), a B1 theme kept in 18 (1 bag), each with three concepts or more, unresolved 9.
• Boundary tags: T3-009|T3-043 62, T3-009|T3-073 29, T3-029|T3-073 18, T3-009|T3-117 10, T3-073|T3-105 8, T3-009|T3-038 5, T3-054|T3-111 5, T3-057|T3-105 3, T3-018|T3-031 3, T3-009|T3-104 3, T3-105|T3-156 3, T3-031|T3-135 2, T3-009|T3-026 2, T3-038|T3-065 2.
• Checks: b4_own_support_check.py 0; b4_lone_b1_check.py --packets 7: 18 kept lone B1 themes, all with three concepts or more; b4_bag_named_check.py --packets 7 flagged 8 lines, each already weighed in its why, none changed; b4_both_readers_dropped.py (new): 5 lines, each a theme with no concept of its own, none dropped by the level rule.
• Mapping: assign_final.jsonl rewritten: 7,844 lines (class 1 2,566, class 2 1,990, ruled 3,288, pending 0).
• All seven packets: 3,288 rulings; genuine-joint 1,651, author-error 571, scheme-ambiguous 451, item-is-a-bag 255, author-disagrees 208, reader-error 152; unresolved 185 (5.6%); named_neither 757 (23.0%); agreement before 0.491, after 0.646.

Readings first applied in packet 7

Each is named in its rulings' whys and in boundaries.md:

• Themes both readers placed. A theme both readers placed, with a concept of its own, is not dropped by the level rule on a placement count only my B1 tips (kanye t28, msu t11). Two earlier rulings were corrected under it or for a miscount (ChronoTrigger t06, mindcrack t11).
• The clone canvas. The rebuild, the calls to it and its progress count toward T3-054; acts it does not name (the timer, a chat) toward their own themes (catholicism t09; twice t18 scheme-ambiguous).
• The room's own work. "The work" in T3-073 and T3-058 is the room's own (uvic t04, destiny t08, pathofexile t17, hungary t07).
• A report that names the attacker. The report leads (T3-073); T3-087 takes who is behind the damage or why (nbaspurs t13, overwatch t14).
• T3-082 takes only a mark the room did not know of (mysterydungeon t08, MiamiHurricanes t06).
• T3-111 does not reach a standing community's new project (forsen t11, paladins t21).
• Cleaned copies of the final canvas after the lock are records, T3-105.
• T3-156 takes only a mark from the canvas; theme or header art the words do not tie to the canvas is T3-017 (fivenightsatfreddys t14, trees t12); flairs with no canvas mark are T3-185 (THE_R t04).

Defects for stage C1, from packet 7

Logged here and in adjudication_report.md; the scheme is untouched:

• T3-003's discriminator against T3-043 speaks only of crediting others; T3-043's discriminator against T3-003 sends parts claimed after the work to T3-043. They should say the same thing.
• T3-073's and T3-058's must_show do not say "the room's own work".
• T3-054's must_show against T3-038's and T3-002's: no field says which takes calls and progress on a later canvas.
• T3-111's "the canvas sub's or chat's future" and a standing community's new project.
• T3-087's discriminator against T3-058 and one person traced after the close (T3-058 takes only a room or group).
• T3-117's "regret at the end" and a late reader's regret or question.
• T3-021's "cleaning stray ones" and a cleaned copy after the lock.
• T3-164's must_show and attachment to a flag, a creed read into a mark, or solidarity of unknown origin.
• T3-009's "the work said to have lasted to the end" against T3-073's "what survived".
• T3-052's "Pictures around the room's mark" and a picture whose owner or place the words do not give.
• Single sentences: T3-154's "implied rivals", T3-044's newcomers, T3-156's discriminator against T3-031, T3-038's discriminator against T3-009, T3-131's, T3-127's, T3-011's and T3-082's must_show, T3-029's discriminator against T3-183, T3-017's must_not_show, and T3-063's must_show for a post that is not a canvas post (CC-004).

What I doubt

• My B1 against two agreeing readers. Under the lone-B1 rule a theme of mine with three concepts stood against both readers in 18 class 4 items. Several rest on a reading of mine about the words: that Kekistan is another room's work (destiny t08), that theme and header art is not from the canvas (fivenightsatfreddys t14, trees t12), that alarms call the room to the fight (overwatch t14). A stranger may not read them so.
• The clone-canvas reading is mine. T3-054's must_show names the rebuild; T3-038's and T3-002's also take progress and calls. I chose T3-054 and logged the defect.
• "The act its words lead with." I used it to place a concept that does two acts, beyond the T3-009|T3-043 pair where it was written (DCFU t03, Goodboye t11, portugal t29, Rainbow6 t16, nbaspurs t13). It decides some rulings on word order.
• Fragment quotes and coders' labels. Where a concept's quote is a fragment ('Two wars', 'Ended 3am on a weekday'), I read the coder's label with it (dwarffortress t11, straya t10, cirkeltrek t10, twice t17); where the quote is whole and says less than the label, I read the words (SquareSpiral t14's request offer was left out). The line is mine.
• Three themes in class 3. 77 of the 108 named_neither rulings place three themes: my B1 adds a third act beside the two the readers split on, often one concept alone at its level (TransFlagPlace t13's T3-132). The level rule allows it; it is still my pull.
• Sad faces. Whether ':(' after an account voices grief decided several T3-029|T3-073 rulings. I followed T3-029's decide_when_both and let the account lead where the sad face trails (geometrydash t07, rangers t13).

Slips

• Two packet 7 rulings were wrong when first written and were corrected through --replace: mindcrack t11 (T3-029's placements miscounted) and ChronoTrigger t06 (T3-157, placed by both readers, dropped on a count only my B1 tipped).
• After the first compaction I drafted rulings-02 from memory and checked every id and quote against chunk-02 before the dry run.
• After the second compaction I fetched four tests and read the rest of chunk 14 before re-reading the head and the stage file; the reconciliation line was logged before any write.
• Two items carried the boundary T3-031|T3-135 with no paragraph until the packet summary showed it; the paragraph was added to boundaries.md before the summary was written.
• The first draft of the full report listed europe t21's T3-073 among packet 7's author-disagrees themes; europe t21 is a bag. Corrected before the validator ran.

Content named

National, political, hate and slur content is named in packet 7's whys as the words give it, for example: 'Fuck the Falcons!', 'shit tier AFC peeps' and Mexico's flag offered for destruction (falcons t05); /pol/'s 'hate-fueled' attack, 't-slurs, mentally ill jokes' and 'transphobic or bigoted' (TransFlagPlace t13); 'the german menace' and 'German tyranny' (stlouisblues t05); 'Deus vult!' and 'Second Blue World Order' (thebluecorner t10); 'Ni🅱️🅱️a' and the Kekistani flag (dankmemes t16); 'ZULUL' and 'must have been too racist to remove him' (forsen t07); 'Scroll up faggot.', 'Pinochet Snek' and 'fight the commies' (anarcho_capitalism t13); the swastika drawn on Doc (ethoslab t06); 'Fuck /r/Denmark' and 'FUCK THE DANES!!' (frankocean t12); 'Turkish clay' and 'Defending against Armenia felt like a war' (turkey t14); Brexit and 'cunts and leave' (italy t14); the penis over Argentina's sun, SABAFU for BRICS, 'devolve o ouro', the German '7 a 1' and 'Senna's death might be our 9/11' (brasil t09); 'The fucking swedes man!' and '40 people with 100 accounts and scripts running' (overwatch t14); 'sromotną porażkę butnych germanów' (polska t08); 'Fuckin Seppos' and 'G'Day Cunts' (straya t10); 'los bots de Chávez' (argentina t15); 'comunisti', Aldo Moro and the Piave (theitalyplace t15); 'what a shitty country it's become lately', 'China dipped their finger' and 'It's China trying to invade us' (philippines t10); 'peniss', 'poniggs' and 'communist propaganda' (mylittlepony t15); 'pinches admins mecos' and 'nuestros heroes caidos en guerra' (mexico t16); 'VOOR VORST EN VADERLAND' and 'annexatie' (cirkeltrek t10); 'consuming smaller communities' and 'United Kinodom' (europe t21); the upside-down Philippine flag as a war flag (philippines t12); 'fucking heathens' and 'black void from 4chan' (Rainbow6 t16); 'that ghey ass pink OSU' (wallstreetbets t14); 'the sabotage of the trans-flag or the pride-rainbow' (chess t13).

All seven packets are ruled. The next step of stage B4 is B4b, the blind sample's build.

validate.py B4, after packet 7:

stage B4:
  leg: adjudication
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 3288: {'genuine-joint': 1651, 'scheme-ambiguous': 451, 'reader-error': 152, 'author-error': 571, 'author-disagrees': 208, 'item-is-a-bag': 255}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 3288, outstanding 0
  coder conflicts 72

warn   RETURN-B4.md is not yet written; the build leg owes it, and this leg was read as an adjudication leg because neither RETURN-B4.md, a stage-B4 manifest entry nor _packets-B4/ exists

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 1 warnings

The blind sample, built at B4b (2026-10-13)

The PI's message for this leg (14:22Z) carries J's rulings for it:

• The sample is 500 items, 250 drawn uniformly from the analysed set and 250 from the adjudicated items, by a recorded seed, the two strata reported apart and never pooled (J, 12 October). This replaces §10's fifty and fifty.
• Two fresh DeepSeek V4.1 Flash readers per item, on the reader route arm.json sets for B4, for comparability with B2 and B3.
• A second arm on the same packets: OpenAI gpt-6-astra at medium effort, two replications, run on J's computer by the Codex orchestrator from a copy of my packets, reported apart and never pooled. No Claude reader.
• The packets are built once, for both arms. Both arms are declared here and in the manifest entry. Nothing else in §10 changes: no ruling, ledger, note or hint in any packet.

Declared before the draw

• What it measures. Transmission after revision (FLEET.md): whether fresh readers holding only the frozen scheme reach the settled line. It is not reliability and is never called that. The settled line is each item's standing placement in assign_final.jsonl as at the B4a-07 close. No packet carries it.
• Stratum U, uniform. 250 items drawn uniformly at random, without replacement, from the analysed set: the 7,844 second-order themes of assign_final.jsonl. It says whether the scheme decides the ordinary item. About 42% of the analysed set was adjudicated, so U will hold adjudicated items; they stay in U and are reported in U.
• Stratum A, adjudicated. 250 items drawn uniformly at random, without replacement, from the 3,288 ruled items of disagreements.jsonl that U did not take. It says whether my rulings can be reached by a stranger. Drawing A from what U left keeps the strata disjoint, so each item is served once and counts in one stratum only.
• What stays in the frame. Items with an unresolved ruling stay; the check leg excludes their readings from the fresh-against-settled denominator and says how many (§12). Gold and pilot items stay as corpus items; nothing marks them.
• No redraw. No drawn item is swapped out for any reason.
• The seed: 20261013. U is random.Random("20261013:U").sample over the analysed set sorted by room and theme id. A is random.Random("20261013:A").sample over the ruled items U did not take, in the same order. The serving order is random.Random("20261013:order").shuffle of the 500, with the strata mixed, so no packet shows a stratum. The script is out/_analysis/b4b_sample.py. It writes out/sample-B4.jsonl, which holds each item's stratum, sits outside the packets folder and is never served.
• Arm 1, the fleet's readers. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, two fresh readers per item, one dispatch, each packet to two readers, never the same reader for both readings of an item. The route is the one arm.json sets for B4; my platform file lists "@preset/cheap x2 via gateway". CONTROL/arm.json is outside what I may read, so the served model, route, effort and decoding are taken from the dispatch's _fleet_raw/B4/arm.json at the check.
• Arm 2, J's second arm. OpenAI gpt-6-astra at medium effort, two replications, run by the Codex orchestrator on J's computer from a copy of out/_packets-B4/, under the same RETURN-B4.md. Reported apart; never pooled with arm 1.
• The comparisons. For each arm, each reading is compared with the settled line on its own: 500 items × 2 readings = 1,000 comparisons, a rate over readings, reported per stratum (500 each). The two readers' agreement with each other is reported beside it, per stratum. Strata, arms and the two kinds of figure are never pooled.
• The agreement definition: stage B2's, unchanged (notes-B2.md, "which stages B3 and B4 reuse unchanged"). Two placement sets agree by their Jaccard index; ["T3-004"] against ["T3-004","T3-011"] scores 0.5, partial agreement. Alpha is Krippendorff's alpha with distance 1 − Jaccard, over items run at more than one reader; chance correction is over sets, the expected disagreement computed from all the placement sets of the comparison, pooled. Exact agreement on the primary is reported beside, never in place. Scoring reads pass 1 only, as at B3.
• Exemplars: none. Stage B3 served none (its manifest entry: "none served").
• No bag flags. B3's packets marked some items as flagged bags from my B1 grouping. Here a flag would show the reader something of my reading, so no item is marked. A reader may still return a bag under the return specification.
• The packets (out/_analysis/b4b_packets.py, into out/_packets-B4/):
  • The shared pages come from scheme_final.jsonl through tools/packets.py's scheme_pages: index.md and G01.md to G21.md, no exemplars, each under 50 KB.
  • Item packets carry fleet ids only (J), rendered by stage B2's renderer (b2_packets_fleet.py): the heading with the room and the fleet theme id, the label, the note, and each concept under its fleet id with the participants' words. tools/packets.py B4 writes room ids, the fault behind QB3-003, so the builder is a script on B2's renderer, as at B2 and B3.
  • No sibling block (as packets.py B4 and stage B2), no bag flag, no stratum, no ruling, no reader's line and no hint that the items were decided. Packets are named S05-NN, as packets.py B4 names them. Each holds a title, the brief with its own item count, the items and the end line.
  • Caps: at most 15 items a packet (J's cap at B2 and B3) and every packet file under 50 KB (§10 and FLEET.md), cut consecutively from the serving order so that the largest packet is as small as the caps allow.
  • One item of the analysed set exceeds the ceiling on its own: leagueoflegends t02, 89,162 bytes rendered (out/_analysis/b4b_item_sizes.py; the next largest is 48,324). If the draw takes it, it is served alone in a packet of its own under B2's and B3's shape (at most 180,000 bytes of item text, J). That is the one exception, declared here before the draw.
  • MANIFEST.json gives per packet the items, bytes, item bytes, sha256, count key and excludes, and codes_by_item for fleet.py's citation check. It names no stratum.
  • The build stops on a room id in an id position, a canvas field, or a broken cap other than the declared exception.
• RETURN-B4.md as at B3. It holds rule 0 in the contract's words, the prediction line, the return line, the multiplacement record, the second pass, the end marker and the confirm line, with B3's fields. It changes only where the packets differ: no sibling block and no flagged bag; the batch is the packet name; the replicate is as given with the reader id. Keeping B3's task lets the figures stand beside B3's.
• The manifest entry on stage A1's schema (both arms, the seed, decoding, reader counts) is appended to run_manifest.json before the first packet leaves.

The draw

out/_analysis/b4b_sample.py --write, seed 20261013, as declared. out/sample-B4.jsonl holds 500 lines (sha256 2fe441cd…); the record is out/_analysis/b4b_sample.json. The next table gives the two strata.

• Stratum A was drawn from the 3,178 ruled items U did not take; the strata are disjoint.
• leagueoflegends t02, the one item over the ceiling alone, was not drawn, so the declared exception does not arise.
• The settled line is assign_final.jsonl at sha256 d3506a88… (disagreements.jsonl ec740989…). The check leg reads these files, not anything in the packets.
• No item was redrawn.

The build

• RETURN-B4.md is RETURN-B3.md's specification with the changes declared above. Its rule 0 is the contract's current wording. RETURN-B3.md had carried the wording from before J's amendment of 11 October (the also_present record and the concepts behind a placement), while B3's index page, built by scheme_pages from the contract, already carried the amended rule. So B3's readers saw two wordings, and B4's readers see one. The builder refused to build until RETURN-B4.md matched the contract (out/_analysis/b4b_rule0_diff.py). The fields a reader returns are unchanged from B3.
• The packets (out/_analysis/b4b_packets.py --write, in out/_packets-B4/):
  • index.md and G01.md to G21.md, byte for byte the pages served at B3, the largest 33,636 bytes.
  • 34 packets, S05-01 to S05-34, cut consecutively from the serving order. They hold 10 to 15 items and run 21,280 to 49,994 bytes; 34 is the fewest the caps allow. The largest item is 25,636 bytes.
  • MANIFEST.json: 500 lines due, with codes_by_item for each packet.
  • out/_analysis/b4b_order.json records which items each packet holds. It sits outside the packets folder.
• Fleet ids only. nyjets t11 is in the sample; its coder note names c0104, which is served under its fleet id with the words unchanged, as at B3. No room-id-like string stands in participants' words in these packets.
• The check (out/_analysis/b4b_packets_check.py): 0 errors.
  • The folder holds only the 22 pages, the 34 packets and MANIFEST.json.
  • Each packet is under 51,200 bytes, ends with the end line, and agrees with its MANIFEST entry and its brief's count.
  • The 500 items are served once each, in the serving order, and each heading's fleet id translates back to its room.
  • Each item's concept lines are exactly its codes_by_item.
  • No packet holds a third-order id, a room id in an id position or a canvas field.
  • 22 lines carry a word that could hint at a decision ("ruling", "settled", "disagree", "unresolved"). I read all 22: each is a coder's label or note or the participants' words ("once we settled down", "I disagree", "ruling that logos are art", a note's "unresolved search for responsibility"). None speaks of my rulings.
• The manifest. Entry 12 of run_manifest.json (stage B4, leg B4b; out/_analysis/b4b_manifest.py) declares:
  • arm 1, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, two readers per item on the route arm.json sets for B4, 68 agents;
  • arm 2, OpenAI gpt-6-astra at medium effort, two replications by the Codex orchestrator on J's computer, 68 agents;
  • decoding as each arm's dispatch sets it; the seed and its three streams; 500 items, 34 packets and 1,000 comparisons an arm;
  • the caps; no exemplars, bag flags or sibling blocks;
  • the sha256 of the scheme, RETURN-B4.md (0c1fb067…), the sample and the settled line.
• The manifest, corrected. validate.py B4 found that entry 12 carried the reader count only inside each arm, with no n_agents at the top. I did not edit it. Entry 13 (out/_analysis/b4b_manifest2.py) is a copy with n_agents 2 (two fresh readers per item in each arm; 68 reader sessions an arm) and a supersedes field naming entry 12, which stays in the file.
• The validator's warnings. Eight files mention "ruling" or "unresolved". I read all 13 lines:
  • G01.md (T3-093's must_show, "jokes about ruling") and G14.md (six lines on T3-162, "a host ruling on requests") are the frozen scheme's words, served byte for byte at B3.
  • S05-02, S05-10, S05-13, S05-17, S05-19 and S05-33 hold coders' labels and notes and participants' words.
  • None speaks of my rulings. The scheme is frozen and the coders' words are served as written, so the warnings stand as read.
• What the dispatch needs. Arm 1: out/_packets-B4/ and out/RETURN-B4.md, each packet to two fresh readers. Arm 2: a copy of the same folder and the same RETURN-B4.md. The check leg will read the returns from _fleet_raw/B4/, translate them back through fleet_ids.jsonl, and score each arm and each stratum apart.

What I doubt

• The disjoint strata are my reading of J's ruling. "250 drawn uniformly from the analysed set and 250 from the adjudicated items" could also mean two independent draws that may share items. I drew A from what U left so that no item is read twice and counted in both strata. U still holds 110 ruled items, about the 42% the analysed set holds, and they are reported in U.
• The task differs from B3's in three ways the stage requires: no sibling block, no bag flags, and rule 0 in one wording. A difference between the B4 and B3 figures may come partly from these, not only from the scheme.
• Two arms on one packet set. Arm 2's readers are a different model family, run outside the fleet's dispatch. Their figures say whether the written instrument decides for another architecture. They are never pooled with arm 1's.

Slips

• My first manifest entry put the reader count only inside each arm; the validator caught it, and entry 13 supersedes it.
• A diary line named G01's warning theme with a placeholder in place of its id; the next line corrected it to T3-093.

The build leg closes with done.sh B4 --cut packets-out. The dispatch is not mine. The next launch of stage B4 is the check leg.

validate.py B4, at the build's close:

stage B4:
  leg: build
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 3288: {'genuine-joint': 1651, 'scheme-ambiguous': 451, 'reader-error': 152, 'author-error': 571, 'author-disagrees': 208, 'item-is-a-bag': 255}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 3288, outstanding 0
  coder conflicts 72

warn   _packets-B4/G01.md mentions a ruling, an adjudication or the gold key; no hint that these items were decided before reaches a blind reader (section 10). Read the packet.  [8 lines with this shape; first: G01.md]

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 8 warnings

Stratum R, the other 18 unresolved items (B4b-p2, 2026-10-13)

J's answer at 16:43 Berlin, after the PI told him that 18 of the 185 unresolved items were already in the draw (15 in A, 3 in U): "draw other 18". The PI reads it as follows (message of 14:49Z): draw 18 more of the unresolved items that sample-B4.jsonl does not hold, by a recorded seed, as a third stratum reported apart and never pooled with U or A. It is diagnostic: whether fresh readers converge where I found that no placement's test takes the concepts. It does not resolve those items. The 500 items and the 34 packets stay as built, and both arms read the new packets.

Declared before the draw

• The frame. The unresolved rulings of disagreements.jsonl (185 items) that sample-B4.jsonl does not hold: 167 items, sorted by room and theme id.
• The draw. 18 items, uniformly at random, without replacement: random.Random("20261013:R").sample over the frame. The serving order of the 18 is random.Random("20261013:R-order").shuffle. The seed is the sample's, 20261013, with two new streams. Script out/_analysis/b4b_sample_R.py. It writes a sibling record, out/sample-B4-R.jsonl (stratum R, orders 501 to 518), and leaves sample-B4.jsonl as it stands. No redraw.
• The 18 already drawn (3 in U, 15 in A) stay in their strata. As declared for B4b, their readings leave the fresh-against-settled denominator and are counted.
• What R measures, and its denominator. R has no settled line to compare against: each of its items is unresolved, and its line in assign_final.jsonl stays as it is. For each arm the check reports, over R's 18 items and 36 readings:
  • the two readers' agreement with each other (mean Jaccard, primary match beside it), and alpha on the 18 by stage B2's definition;
  • for each item, whether the two readers' primaries meet;
  • whether the fresh placements fall among the placements the item already had (reading A, reading B, my B1) or outside them. The same diagnostic for the 18 unresolved items already in U and A is reported beside R, by stratum, never pooled with R or with each other. No fresh reading changes a ruling.
• The packets. Same §10 rules as the 34, in out/_packets-B4/ beside them: fleet ids only, on B2's renderer, the same brief and end line, at most 15 items, each file under 50 KB, no sibling block, bag flag, stratum or ruling. The cut is chosen so that the largest packet is as small as the caps allow. The names run on from the 34: S05-35 and following. The exception declared for B4b carries over: an item over the ceiling alone would be served alone under B2's and B3's shape.
• The records.
  • MANIFEST.json gains the new packets' entries; the 34 entries stay as they are. The manifest as it stood is kept first as out/_analysis/packets-B4_MANIFEST_before_R.json.
  • out/_analysis/b4b_order_R.json records each R packet's items.
  • run_manifest.json gains an entry that supersedes entry 13 and names stratum R, its seed streams, 36 packets and 518 items.

The draw

out/_analysis/b4b_sample_R.py --write, as declared.

• Records. out/sample-B4-R.jsonl holds 18 lines, orders 501 to 518, sha256 1d0c75a6…; the record is out/_analysis/b4b_sample_R.json. sample-B4.jsonl is unchanged (2fe441cd…).
• The frame. 167 items. The other 18 unresolved items are already drawn: 3 in U and 15 in A, listed in the record.
• Stratum R. 18 items from 18 rooms, by class: 3 nine, 4 eight, 5 one. None is a gold or pilot item.
• Why each item is unresolved.
  • 13 are scheme-ambiguous with no placement: T3-001's must_show or discriminators five, and T3-023, T3-139, T3-005, T3-052, T3-113, T3-192, T3-029 and T3-164 one each.
  • 5 are author-disagrees. One is a class 5 bare title (kuwait t09). The other four are class 4 items where the lone-B1 rule left my theme out and the readers' test took nothing: touhou t18, shield t07, austria t12, yogscast t11.
• Where they came from. By adjudication packet: 1 seven, 2 two, 4 three, 6 four, 7 two.
• For the check. out/_analysis/b4b_R_list.py (read-only) lists each item's reading A, reading B and my B1, so the check can tell whether the fresh placements fall among them.

The next table gives the 18 in serving order, with the placements each had.

In 8 of the 18 items the two B3 readers agreed and I still found that their test takes nothing (class 4). Those are the items where fresh readers converging on the same theme would most test my reading.

The build

• The packets. out/_analysis/b4b_packets_R.py --write uses the B4b builder's renderer, brief, end line and checks. It wrote S05-35 (8 items, 8,204 bytes) and S05-36 (10 items, 5,947 bytes) into out/_packets-B4/ beside the 34. They carry fleet ids only; no room-id-like string stands in participants' words.
• Before writing, the builder checked that the 34 packets matched their MANIFEST sha256 and that no S05-35 existed.
• The manifest file. MANIFEST.json was first kept as out/_analysis/packets-B4_MANIFEST_before_R.json, then given the two new entries only: 36 entries, 518 lines due. out/_analysis/b4b_order_R.json records the R packets' items.
• The check. out/_analysis/b4b_packets_check2.py runs the B4b check over both sample records together and adds a test that B4b's 34 entries are unchanged. It found 0 errors: 518 items served once each in order, each translating back to its room. The R packets add no line with a word that could hint at a decision. One coder's note in S05-36 says a single-code theme "preserves rather than resolves that ambiguity". That is the coder's word about the coder's own grouping, served as at B3, not a mark of my ruling.
• The run manifest. Entry 14 of run_manifest.json (out/_analysis/b4b_manifest3.py) supersedes entry 13, which stays in the file. It records:
  • 518 items in 36 packets (8 to 15 items, 5,947 to 49,994 bytes) and stratum R with its seed streams and sha256;
  • n_agents 2, with 72 reader sessions an arm;
  • for each arm, 1,000 settled-line comparisons for U and A, and R's 36 readings scored only for the readers' own agreement and convergence.
• The arms are as declared at B4b: both read S05-35 and S05-36.

What I doubt

• R packets hold unresolved items only. A reader cannot know that, but they are thin items (titles, single replies, April Fools play with no canvas in the words). A reader of S05-36 meets ten such items together, while a reader of the 34 meets them one at a time among ordinary items. If R's readers agree less than U's readers on similar items, the packet's make-up may be part of the reason.
• Eighteen items are few. R's figures say where fresh readers land on these items; they cannot estimate a rate for the 185.

validate.py B4, at B4b-p2's close:

stage B4:
  leg: build
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 3288: {'genuine-joint': 1651, 'scheme-ambiguous': 451, 'reader-error': 152, 'author-error': 571, 'author-disagrees': 208, 'item-is-a-bag': 255}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 3288, outstanding 0
  coder conflicts 72

warn   _packets-B4/G01.md mentions a ruling, an adjudication or the gold key; no hint that these items were decided before reaches a blind reader (section 10). Read the packet.  [8 lines with this shape; first: G01.md]

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 8 warnings

Stratum R, all 185 unresolved items (B4b-p3, 2026-10-13)

J corrected the PI's reading at 17:10 Berlin: "No. There were some 180that were un resolved. They should all be in r". Stratum R holds all 185 unresolved items, not a draw of 18 (the PI's message of 15:11Z). This replaces the B4b-p2 declaration of R's frame and size. The rest of that declaration stands: R is diagnostic, reported apart, never pooled with U or A, and no fresh reading changes a ruling. Nothing has been dispatched; both arms wait for this build.

Declared before the build

• R's members: all 185 unresolved rulings of disagreements.jsonl.
  • 18 already in R: drawn at B4b-p2 and served in S05-35 and S05-36, orders 501 to 518, as built.
  • 149 added now: the unresolved items neither R nor the 500 holds (185 − 18 in R − 18 in U and A).
  • 18 already in U (3) and A (15): these count in R from the same readings, as the PI reads it. No arm reads any item twice, and U and A stay as drawn.
  • The PI's "add the 167" counts the 18 in U and A among them. 167 = 185 − 18 in R; 149 of the 167 are served anew, and 18 are read once, in their U or A packets.
• Reading the 18 twice: one reason, kept once until J rules.
  • The reason. The packet context differs. The 167 items read in R packets meet only unresolved items. The 18 in U and A were read among ordinary items. Reading those 18 again in R packets would give R one context throughout and would let the two contexts be compared on the same items.
  • Against it. It would have one arm read an item twice, with different reader sessions, and the readings could not count in both strata without a rule for which counts.
  • What I do. Following the PI, I keep the 18 once. R's figures are reported whole over 185 and split by where the item was read: R packets, 167; U and A packets, 18.
• No draw, one order. Every unresolved item is taken, so there is no sampling seed. The 149 are served in the order random.Random("20261013:R-all-order").shuffle gives over them sorted by room and theme id, orders 519 to 667.
• The R record. out/sample-B4-R.jsonl (18 lines, B4b-p2) is kept as out/sample-B4-R.superseded-B4b-p2.jsonl and rewritten with all 185 members.
  • Each line gives the item's stratum ("R"), its order, and where it is read: R packets for the 167, or "U" or "A" for the 18, whose order there is null because their reading sits under their U or A order in sample-B4.jsonl.
  • Each line also gives the class and the taxonomy, and how the item joined: drawn at B4b-p2, added at B4b-p3, or already in U or A.
• R's denominator, per arm. 185 items, 370 readings, 185 reader pairs. The diagnostic is the one declared at B4b-p2:
  • the readers' agreement with each other (mean Jaccard, primary beside it) and alpha by stage B2's definition;
  • whether primaries meet;
  • whether fresh placements fall among reading A's, reading B's and my B1's placements or outside them. It is reported over all 185 and split by the context above. There is no settled-line comparison for R. The 18 in U and A still leave U's and A's fresh-against-settled denominators as declared at B4b. Their readers' agreement with each other is reported in U and A as drawn and in R, each stratum apart.
• The packets. The 149 go into out/_packets-B4/ beside the 36, under the same §10 rules: fleet ids, B2's renderer, the same brief and end line, at most 15 items, each file under 50 KB, no sibling block, bag flag, stratum or ruling, and the largest packet as small as the caps allow. Names run on from S05-37. The exception for an item over the ceiling alone carries over (leagueoflegends t02, if it is among the 149, is served alone under B2's and B3's shape).
• The other records.
  • MANIFEST.json gains the new entries only; the 36 entries stay. The manifest as it stood is kept first as out/_analysis/packets-B4_MANIFEST_before_R_all.json.
  • out/_analysis/b4b_order_R_all.json records the new packets' items.
  • run_manifest.json gains an entry that supersedes entry 14 and names R's 185 members, its order stream, and the packet and line counts.

The record

out/_analysis/b4b_R_all.py --write.

• Files. out/sample-B4-R.jsonl now holds 185 lines; the B4b-p2 record (18 lines) is kept as out/sample-B4-R.superseded-B4b-p2.jsonl. The run's record is out/_analysis/b4b_sample_R_all.json. sample-B4.jsonl is unchanged.
• Where R's items are read. 167 in R packets: the 18 drawn at B4b-p2 (orders 501 to 518) and the 149 added (orders 519 to 667, in the order of Random("20261013:R-all-order")). 3 in U and 15 in A, with order null and counted from the same readings.
• R's make-up. By class: 3 seventy-one, 4 seventy-eight, 5 thirty-six. By taxonomy: scheme-ambiguous 114, author-disagrees 71. By adjudication packet: 1 sixty-six, 2 nineteen, 3 nine, 4 twelve, 5 six, 6 forty-nine, 7 twenty-four.
• One gold item is among R's 185 and stays as a corpus item, as declared at B4b.
• leagueoflegends t02 is not among the 149, so the declared exception does not arise.

The build

• The packets. out/_analysis/b4b_packets_R_all.py --write uses the B4b builder's renderer, brief, end line and checks. It wrote S05-37 to S05-46 into out/_packets-B4/ beside the 36: 10 packets, the fewest the caps allow, of 14 or 15 items and 7,619 to 14,070 bytes. The largest item is 2,937 bytes. Fleet ids only; no room-id-like string stands in participants' words.
• Before writing, the 36 packets matched their MANIFEST sha256 and no S05-37 existed.
• The manifest file. MANIFEST.json was first kept as out/_analysis/packets-B4_MANIFEST_before_R_all.json, then given the ten new entries only: 46 entries, 667 lines due. out/_analysis/b4b_order_R_all.json records the new packets' items.
• The check. out/_analysis/b4b_packets_check3.py found 0 errors:
  • 667 items served once each, in orders 1 to 667, each translating back to its room;
  • the 18 R lines read in U and A are U's and A's own items and are not served again;
  • the 34 entries of B4b and the 36 of B4b-p2 are unchanged.
• Two new lines with the word "unresolved", both in S05-45, are coders' notes on what an absent image or video leaves open ("leaves the meaning of space unresolved"). They are the coders' words, served as at B3, and say nothing of my rulings.
• The run manifest. Entry 15 of run_manifest.json (out/_analysis/b4b_manifest4.py) supersedes entry 14, which stays. It records:
  • R's 185 members, its order stream, the R record's sha256 and its superseded copy;
  • 667 items served in 46 packets (8 to 15 items, 5,947 to 49,994 bytes);
  • n_agents 2, with 92 reader sessions an arm;
  • R's 370 readings an arm (334 from R packets, 36 from U and A packets), scored only for the readers' own agreement and convergence.
• The arms are as declared at B4b. Both read all 46 packets. Nothing has been dispatched.

What I doubt

• Packet context is now R's main confound. The 167 R items read in R packets meet only unresolved items, ten R packets in a row of thin material. The 18 in U and A were read among ordinary items. I report R whole and split by context, but the split compares 167 items with 18, so it cannot settle how much the context matters. Reading the 18 again in R packets would settle it on the same items. I name that reason here and keep them once until J rules.
• R has no settled line. Its readers' agreement with each other can be high on a placement no earlier reading or ruling made, and that would not resolve the item. R says whether strangers converge, not whether they are right.

Slips

• The B4b-p3 declaration and its diary line were written in one turn, as parallel calls. The edit had answered before I read the log's output, but the rule is to log a write only after the tool answers.

validate.py B4, at B4b-p3's close:

stage B4:
  leg: build
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 3288: {'genuine-joint': 1651, 'scheme-ambiguous': 451, 'reader-error': 152, 'author-error': 571, 'author-disagrees': 208, 'item-is-a-bag': 255}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 3288, outstanding 0
  coder conflicts 72

warn   _packets-B4/G01.md mentions a ruling, an adjudication or the gold key; no hint that these items were decided before reaches a blind reader (section 10). Read the packet.  [9 lines with this shape; first: G01.md]

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 9 warnings

Stratum R, the 18 from U and A read again in R packets (B4b-p4, 2026-10-13)

J at 17:21 Berlin, on the B4b-p3 build: "We should have 685 in total" (the PI's message of 15:26Z). That is 250 in U, 250 in A and all 185 unresolved items in R. The PI's reading at 17:10, that the 18 unresolved items in U and A count in R from their U and A readings, was wrong. This replaces what the B4b-p3 declaration said of those 18. The rest of it stands: R is all 185 unresolved rulings, diagnostic, reported apart and never pooled with U or A, and no fresh reading changes a ruling. Nothing has been dispatched.

Declared before the build

• The 18 join R as R's own items. The 3 unresolved items in U and the 15 in A are R's items, served again in R's own packets. U and A stay as drawn: their 500 items, their 34 packets and their orders 1 to 500 do not change.
• Each arm reads these 18 items twice, once in their U or A packet and once in an R packet, in different reader sessions.
  • Each reading counts only in the stratum of the packet it came from. The U or A reading is scored against the settled line as declared at B4b, where an unresolved settled item leaves that denominator and is counted. The R reading is scored as R's.
  • No reading counts in two strata, and the two readings of one item are never pooled.
• 685 lines due per reader set: 500 in U and A, 185 in R. They hold 667 distinct items; the 18 are the only items served twice.
• No draw, one order. The 18 are sorted by room and theme id, then served in the order random.Random("20261013:R-ua-order").shuffle gives, orders 668 to 685.
• The R record. out/sample-B4-R.jsonl (185 lines, B4b-p3) is kept as out/sample-B4-R.superseded-B4b-p3.jsonl and rewritten.
  • All 185 lines are read in R packets, orders 501 to 685.
  • A new field also_in gives "U" or "A" for the 18 and null for the other 167. The 18 lines get their order, read_in "R" and a new joined text; the 167 lines change in nothing else.
• R's denominator, per arm. 185 items, 370 readings, all from R packets, so R is read in one context throughout.
  • The diagnostic is the one declared at B4b-p2: the readers' agreement with each other by stage B2's definition, primary beside it; whether primaries meet; whether fresh placements fall among reading A's, reading B's and my B1's placements.
  • The B4b-p3 split of R by reading context is withdrawn.
  • On the 18 only, R's readings are set beside the same arm's U or A readings of the same items: whether the readers' agreement with each other and their placements differ between the two packet contexts. This is a side note on 18 items, reported apart.
• The packets. The 18 go into out/_packets-B4/ beside the 46, under the same §10 rules: fleet ids, B2's renderer, the same brief and end line, at most 15 items, each file under 50 KB, no sibling block, bag flag, stratum or ruling, and the largest packet as small as the caps allow. Names run on from S05-47. No packet says that an item is served elsewhere. The exception for an item over the ceiling alone carries over if it arises.
• The other records.
  • MANIFEST.json gains the new entries only; the 46 entries stay. The manifest as it stands is kept first as out/_analysis/packets-B4_MANIFEST_before_R_ua.json.
  • out/_analysis/b4b_order_R_ua.json records the new packets' items.
  • A new read-only check, out/_analysis/b4b_packets_check4.py, allows exactly the 18 repeats: each served once in orders 1 to 500 and once in orders 668 to 685, and no other item served twice.
  • run_manifest.json gains an entry that supersedes entry 15 and names the 685 lines, the order stream, and the packet counts.

The record

out/_analysis/b4b_R_ua.py --write.

• Files. out/sample-B4-R.jsonl holds 185 lines, all read in R packets, orders 501 to 685. The B4b-p3 record (185 lines) is kept as out/sample-B4-R.superseded-B4b-p3.jsonl. The run's record is out/_analysis/b4b_sample_R_ua.json. sample-B4.jsonl is unchanged.
• The 18 from U and A take orders 668 to 685 in the order of Random("20261013:R-ua-order"), with also_in "U" for 3 and "A" for 15. By class: 3 three, 4 nine, 5 six. By taxonomy: scheme-ambiguous 7, author-disagrees 11. None is a gold or pilot item.
• The other 167 lines gain also_in null and change in nothing else; the script compares each with its B4b-p3 line before writing.

The build

• The packets. out/_analysis/b4b_packets_R_ua.py --write uses the B4b builder's renderer, brief, end line and checks. It wrote S05-47 (8 items, 4,576 bytes) and S05-48 (10 items, 4,318 bytes) beside the 46: the fewest packets the caps allow. The largest item is 1,474 bytes. Fleet ids only; no room-id-like string stands in participants' words.
• Before writing, the 46 packets matched their MANIFEST sha256, no S05-47 existed, each of the 18 was among the 500 in the stratum its also_in names, and none was served in S05-35 to S05-46.
• The manifest file. MANIFEST.json was first kept as out/_analysis/packets-B4_MANIFEST_before_R_ua.json, then given the two new entries only: 48 entries, 685 lines due. out/_analysis/b4b_order_R_ua.json records the new packets' items.
• The check. out/_analysis/b4b_packets_check4.py found 0 errors:
  • 685 items served in orders 1 to 685, 667 of them distinct, each translating back to its room;
  • exactly the 18 are served twice, each once in orders 1 to 500 and once in orders 668 to 685;
  • the earlier entries of B4b (34), B4b-p2 (36) and B4b-p3 (46) are unchanged.
• Hint words. The check lists 24 lines with a word that could hint at a decision, the same 24 as at B4b-p3. S05-47 and S05-48 add none.
• The run manifest. Entry 16 of run_manifest.json (out/_analysis/b4b_manifest5.py) supersedes entry 15, which stays. It records:
  • R's 185 members, all read in R packets, the order stream "20261013:R-ua-order", the R record's sha256 and both superseded copies;
  • 685 lines due in 48 packets (8 to 15 items, 4,318 to 49,994 bytes), 667 distinct items;
  • n_agents 2, with 96 reader sessions an arm;
  • R's 370 readings an arm, all from R packets, and the side note on the 18 beside their U or A readings.
• The arms are as declared at B4b. Both read all 48 packets. Nothing has been dispatched.

What I doubt

• R is now read in one context, and it is a thin one. All 185 R items sit in fourteen packets, S05-35 to S05-48, that hold only unresolved items. That removes the B4b-p3 split, but R's figures still describe unresolved items read among unresolved items. They cannot be set beside U's or A's figures as a measure of the items alone.
• The side note on the 18 mixes two causes. Each arm reads each of the 18 in two packets, in different reader sessions. A difference between the two readings is the packet context's and the reader's together. With 18 items and two readers in each packet, it is a side note, not a measure of context.

validate.py B4, at B4b-p4's close:

stage B4:
  leg: build
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 3288: {'genuine-joint': 1651, 'scheme-ambiguous': 451, 'reader-error': 152, 'author-error': 571, 'author-disagrees': 208, 'item-is-a-bag': 255}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 3288, outstanding 0
  coder conflicts 72

warn   _packets-B4/G01.md mentions a ruling, an adjudication or the gold key; no hint that these items were decided before reaches a blind reader (section 10). Read the packet.  [9 lines with this shape; first: G01.md]

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 9 warnings

The check (B4c, 2026-10-13)

The PI's message of 17:08Z says the readers left their files.

• Arm 1. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash at medium effort through fleet.py: out/_fleet_raw/B4/, 96 valid returns, reader ids r1 and r2. The DeepSeek readers had no instructions beyond the message.
• Arm 2. OpenAI gpt-6-astra at medium effort, two replications per packet, run by the Codex orchestrator on J's computer from byte-identical copies of the same messages: out/_fleet_raw/B4-openai-astra/, 96 valid returns as oa1 and oa2. The one exception is S05-27 replicate 1, which is oa3: oa1 failed fleet.py's code check (a concept of another item) and stays on file as oa1.raw.txt, and an earlier oa3 process died with no reply and is kept under interrupted-oa3-20261013T1650Z. The OpenAI readers ran under Codex's built-in instructions, recorded by hash in _control/isolation-PASS.json, with no tools. The handler wrote the arm's .jsonl files with fleet.py's own validator.
• J's rulings. The arms are reported apart and never pooled. Strata U, A and R are reported apart. R holds all 185 unresolved items, so its 18 items that are also in U or A are read twice.

Declared before any figure

• The settled line. assign_final.jsonl at sha256 d3506a88…, as at B4a-07. At this leg's start it, disagreements.jsonl (ec740989…), sample-B4.jsonl (2fe441cd…) and sample-B4-R.jsonl (acfb4169…) are unchanged. A settled set is the line's third_order; an unresolved line's set is empty.
  • No fresh reading changes a ruling. "The placements final" is this file as it stands.
  • Where a paragraph below finds that the settled line moved something it should not have, that goes to the handback as a finding for stage C1. It is not re-ruled here, because a ruling changed after seeing the test's readings would be fitted to the test.
• What is read.
  • Arm 1: each packet's r1.jsonl and r2.jsonl, with their meta (valid true).
  • Arm 2: each packet's oa1.jsonl and oa2.jsonl; for S05-27 replicate 1, oa3.jsonl. No raw.txt is scored, and nothing under interrupted-oa3-… is read.
  • Each .jsonl is checked against its raw.txt: the item lines of the raw reply must equal the .jsonl's lines. For arm 2, each raw.txt must match SHA256SUMS.
  • Replicates: r1 and oa1 (oa3 for S05-27) are replicate 1; r2 and oa2 are replicate 2.
• The assembly, keyed on packet and cell. out/_analysis/b4c_assemble.py writes every pass-1 reading of both arms and all strata, in room ids, to out/_analysis/b4c_readings.jsonl, and the second pass to out/_analysis/b4c_pass2.jsonl.
  • A pass-1 item line is keyed on its packet and position. The item at that cell is the one the order records (b4b_order.json, b4b_order_R.json, b4b_order_R_all.json, b4b_order_R_ua.json) give.
  • The typed T2- id is a label. It must translate back through fleet_ids.jsonl to the cell's item, and the typed room must be that item's room.
  • Concept ids translate back and must be the item's own (codes_by_item).
  • A line that does not resolve is refused by name, and its reading counts as missing.
  • Lines carrying revises are the second pass: kept apart, never scored. The prediction lines are kept apart.
• Three files, never pooled.
  • reassign.jsonl: arm 1's 1,000 readings of U and A, the comparison §12 names. It uses the validator's words: stratum "uniform" (U) or "adjudicated" (A); outcome agrees, disagrees-contested, disagrees-unanimous or disagrees-unresolved.
  • reassign-openai-astra.jsonl: arm 2's 1,000 readings of U and A, with the same fields.
  • readings-R-B4.jsonl: both arms' readings of R's 185 items, 740 lines, each with its arm. R has no settled line, so there is no outcome.
• The outcome of one reading.
  • agrees: the fresh set equals the settled set (Jaccard 1).
  • disagrees-contested: it does not, and the item is in disagreements.jsonl. These are classes 3, 4 and 5: the fleet split; or the fleet agreed outside my B1 grouping; or I had no B1 grouping.
  • disagrees-unanimous: it does not, and the item is not in disagreements.jsonl. These are classes 1 and 2: the two B3 readers agreed and their list stood.
  • disagrees-unresolved: the settled line is unresolved. These readings leave the denominator and are counted.
  • Each line also carries its Jaccard against the settled set, whether the primaries match, the two B3 readers' placements and my B1 grouping.
• The figures, per arm and per stratum.
  • Fresh against settled: mean Jaccard over the readings whose settled line is resolved. The exact rate (the agrees share) and the primary match rate stand beside it.
  • The readers' agreement with each other: mean Jaccard over items, primary match beside it, and Krippendorff's alpha, by stage B2's definition (b2_score.py's jac and alpha), over all the stratum's items.
  • Beside them: the B3 readers' agreement on the same items (b3_classes.jsonl); B3's corpus agreement, 0.786, and alpha, 0.782; the stability floor, 0.807 (stability-B2.md); B2's gold fidelity, 0.624; B3's gold fidelity, 0.645.
  • The two rates §12 asks to compare: the share of readings that disagree, on contested items and on unanimous items. For each disagrees-contested reading, whether it equals one of the B3 readers' sets or my B1 grouping, that is, the same split again.
• Class 2 on a row of its own. A class 2 item's settled line is my whole B1 grouping. The two B3 readers agreed on a proper subset of it. The rest are my B1 themes, placed under the B1 scheme and never placed by a reader or adjudicated.
  • U is reported whole (250 items) and split three ways: class 1, class 2, and U's adjudicated items (classes 3 to 5).
  • For class 2, the figure is also given against the themes the settled line places with concepts (support_by_theme), which are the B3 readers' list.
• Per family.
  • Fresh against settled counts an item in the family of the settled line's first theme.
  • The readers' agreement with each other uses B3's rule: an item counts in the family of each reader's primary.
  • Families with fewer than 10 items in a stratum are shown but not ranked. The worst families are ranked on fresh against settled, per arm and stratum, among families with 10 items or more.
• The unanimous items a fresh reader placed elsewhere. Every item with a disagrees-unanimous reading in either arm is named in transmission-after-revision-B4.md with a paragraph. The paragraph gives what the fleet placed, the settled line, and what each arm's readers placed. It then says which of §12's two readings holds, judged from the item's concepts against the scheme's fields: either the fleet shared an assumption the scheme does not license, or the settled line moved something it should not have. Each is logged in the diary.
• Stratum R, as declared at B4b-p2 and B4b-p4. Per arm, over 185 items:
  • the readers' agreement with each other (Jaccard, primary match) and alpha;
  • whether the two primaries meet;
  • whether each fresh set falls among the item's earlier placements (reading A, reading B, my B1): all its themes among them, some, or none.
  • On the 18 with also_in, R's readings beside the same arm's U or A readings: the readers' agreement in each packet context, and the mean Jaccard of each R reading against each U or A reading of the same item.
• The second pass is not scored. The share of second-pass lines marked changed is reported per arm.
• The licence. Wherever a figure appears, it says that the readers share an architecture with me (arm 1 is the fleet's model; arm 2 is another model family, run under Codex's built-in instruction), so the figure bounds whether the written instrument decides, not whether it is right. "Reliability" appears only in the sentence that denies it.
• Safe stops come after each section of the check: the assembly, the comparison files, the figures, the paragraphs, R. .pause is checked at each.

The assembly

out/_analysis/b4c_assemble.py --write.

• Files. out/_analysis/b4c_readings.jsonl holds 2,739 pass-1 readings in room ids: arm 1 U 499, A 500, R 370; arm 2 U 500, A 500, R 370. b4c_pass2.jsonl holds 2,740 second-pass lines and b4c_predictions.jsonl 192 prediction lines. The record is out/_analysis/b4c_assemble.json.
• Integrity. All 192 accepted returns' .jsonl lines equal the JSON lines of their raw.txt. All 96 of arm 2's raw.txt files match SHA256SUMS. Every cell's item matches MANIFEST.json and the four order records.
• Arm 1's reissues. fleet.py refused 10 returns and reissued them to new reader ids. Five cited a concept not among the item's codes, four listed an also_present theme with fewer than three concepts, and one held a line that was not JSON. Every packet has exactly two accepted returns. Where reissues replaced readers, readings 1 and 2 are the accepted pair by reader number. This amends the declaration's "r1 and oa1 are replicate 1"; no figure depends on the labels, because every figure treats an item's two readings alike.
• Arm 2's reissue. S05-27 replicate 1 is oa3, as the PI said. The handler's REISSUE-VALIDATION.json shows that oa1 cited C0436497 for T2-85354, a concept of another item.
• One line refused, under the declared rule. In S05-23, reader r8 typed position 3's room as "r/traaaaaaannnnnnnns"; the item is traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns t02. Its T2- id and its cell both named that item, so the reading was identifiable, but the declaration requires the typed room to match. So arm 1 has 999 readings, and that item has one reading. These are the two validator warnings on reassign.jsonl: 999 readings, and one item without two.

The comparison and the figures

out/_analysis/b4c_compare.py --write wrote reassign.jsonl (arm 1, 999 readings), reassign-openai-astra.jsonl (arm 2, 1,000) and readings-R-B4.jsonl (740), with every figure in out/_analysis/b4c_figures.json. out/_analysis/b4c_extra.py gives the two figures beside them: U without class 2, and U with class 2 scored against the placed themes. out/transmission-after-revision-B4.md holds the figures, the per-family tables and the paragraphs. In brief:

• Fresh against settled (mean Jaccard, exact rate in brackets): arm 1 U 0.657 (0.452), A 0.544 (0.287); arm 2 U 0.622 (0.431), A 0.554 (0.321).
• The readers' agreement with each other (Jaccard, alpha): arm 1 U 0.781, 0.776; A 0.664, 0.658. Arm 2 U 0.872, 0.869; A 0.804, 0.801. The B3 readers on the same items: U 0.781, 0.775; A 0.514, 0.505.
• U split (arm 1, arm 2): class 1 0.930, 0.802; class 2 against the settled line 0.491, 0.502, and against the placed themes 0.786, 0.610; U's adjudicated items 0.517, 0.535; U without class 2 0.703, 0.655.
• Gold. Stage B2's gold fidelity, 0.624, on the same model at the same effort, is lower than arm 1's U figure by 0.033.
• The worst families on fresh against settled: G14 is among the three worst for both arms in both strata.
• Stratum R (Jaccard, alpha): arm 1 0.623, 0.606; arm 2 0.862, 0.851; B3 readers 0.543. Primaries meet in 116 and 159 of 185. Readings wholly outside the earlier placements: 104 and 134 of 370.
• The 18 read twice. Arm 1 agrees within a packet (0.741, 0.796) about as well as across packets (0.787). Arm 2 agrees within a packet (0.889, 0.861) far better than across packets (0.653).

The unanimous items a fresh reader placed elsewhere

• The items. 79 items have a disagrees-unanimous reading in either arm: 62 in arm 1, 74 in arm 2; 28 of class 1 and 51 of class 2.
• The reading. out/_analysis/b4c_unanimous_packets.py rendered each item's concepts, the fleet's and my B1's placements, the settled line, the four fresh sets and the scheme's fields for every theme named (out/_analysis/b4c_unanimous/chunk-01.md to -08.md). I read each and wrote one paragraph (paragraphs-01.md to -08.md). b4c_transmission_append.py appended the paragraphs to the figures file. Each chunk's verdicts are in the diary.
• The verdict test, fixed after chunk 1 and applied to all 79. "The fleet's shared assumption" requires a field of the scheme that contradicts the fleet's placement. A theme added on concepts the settled line leaves uncarried is "rule 0 applied differently". crystalclear t01's verdict was changed to fit, and logged.
• The tally (out/_analysis/b4c_unanimous_tally.py): the fleet's shared assumption 25, the settled line keeps my B1 themes 22, rule 0 applied differently 24, the scheme does not decide 6, the fresh reading misses a field 2.
• A limit of the reading. The read packets carried the fresh readers' sets but not their why texts, because reassign.jsonl does not keep them. The verdicts rest on the concepts read against the fields.

The placements final

assign_final.jsonl stands as B4a-07 left it: sha256 d3506a88…, 7,844 lines, nothing pending. The check revised no ruling, as declared. The findings that bear on the settled line go to stage C1 through handback-B4.md:

• the class 2 items that keep B1 themes no reader placed;
• the unanimous items where a field contradicts the fleet's placement.

What I doubt

• The 79 verdicts are mine. I made them after seeing where the fresh readers landed. I wrote the scheme and I settled the line. The verdict test is fixed in writing, but each reading of a field is still my own.
• Arm 2's agreement is an upper bound. Its two replications read byte-identical messages under one built-in instruction, and on the 18 items read twice they agree within a packet far more than across packets. Its alpha should not be read as two independent readers.
• Class 2 carries my B1 themes into the settled line. In U, 22 of the 53 class 2 items keep themes that no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed. The 1,990 class 2 items of the corpus were kept by the same rule. I do not extrapolate from 53 to 1,990, but stage C1 should know the settled line holds such themes.
• Stratum A was selected on the fleet's split, so the rise from the fleet's 0.514 to the fresh readers' 0.664 and 0.804 is partly regression toward the corpus mean.
• B4's task differs from B3's by the sibling block, the bag flags and one rule 0 wording, as noted at B4b. A difference between the arms' figures and B3's is not the scheme's alone.

Slips

• The diary line after the assembly said "no .pause" before the check had answered. The check agreed.
• crystalclear t01's verdict was written under a loose test and corrected when the test was fixed (logged).
• A Read call went to a path I had made up, outside the run folder. The permission setting refused it, and nothing was read.
• Two sentences of the figures file were wrong in draft and corrected before the paragraphs were appended (logged). One said all 18 class 2 "fleet" items placed a B1 theme or its sibling; 13 did. The other listed T3-039 among G14's themes; it is G13's.

validate.py B4, at B4c's close. The two warnings on reassign.jsonl are the refused line explained under "The assembly". The validator's "unanimous-but-disagreed 112" counts arm 1's disagrees-unanimous readings, not items; they fall on 62 items.

stage B4:
  leg: check
  settled items 7844 = assignment_items_expected
  rulings 3288: {'genuine-joint': 1651, 'scheme-ambiguous': 451, 'reader-error': 152, 'author-error': 571, 'author-disagrees': 208, 'item-is-a-bag': 255}
  classes 1: 2566, 2: 1990, 3: 2393, 4: 837, 5: 58; contested (3, 4, 5) 3288, ruled 3288, outstanding 0
  coder conflicts 72
  blind readings 999 ({'adjudicated': 500, 'uniform': 499}), rule-2 items in the uniform stratum 53, unanimous-but-disagreed 112

warn   _packets-B4/G01.md mentions a ruling, an adjudication or the gold key; no hint that these items were decided before reaches a blind reader (section 10). Read the packet.  [9 lines with this shape; first: G01.md]
warn   reassign.jsonl has 999 readings; five hundred items by two readers is one thousand (J, 2026-10-12), unless notes-B4.md says why not
warn   reassign.jsonl: 1 items do not have exactly two readings (['traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns/t02'] ...); two fresh readers per item

0 errors (0 distinct shapes), 11 warnings

The third-order scheme, B1e

Written at stage B1, leg B1e, 2026-10-11. 197 themes in 21 families; 14 are on the rare tier (seen in one room, or in rooms that tell one episode). Not frozen: stage B2 tightens it against fresh readers.

How to read a theme. Place each second-order theme on one theme. Add a second or a third only where a concept of its own supports it, and say why one does not carry it. The gate is must show, must not show and decide when both. A discriminator is the question that separates a theme from a near neighbour. A family is an index of themes a reader would confuse, and nothing else. Exemplars are participants' words, with the room and the concept id; rivals are other concepts of the same room that also pass the gate.

Index

G01 April Fools in the sub

• T3-001 staging April Fools fake news: Members post their own April Fools fakes in the sub as if true (news, leaks, patches, releases, claims) and play along with them, fall for them or reveal them.
• T3-023 running an April Fools takeover: The sub is turned into something else for April Fools, by its moderators or by the sub as a body (renamed, restyled, given new rules or a new subject, or one sub's joke raid on another), and members play inside it.
• T3-032 objecting to April Fools posts: Members object to the April Fools jokes in their sub as unfunny, stale, hurtful or in the way, and ask for them to stop or come down.
• T3-048 reacting to official April Fools: Members react to the April Fools jokes of the company, creator, channel or organisation the sub follows: waiting for them, judging them, comparing years, missing them.
• T3-064 spreading the room's joke elsewhere: Members carry their sub's joke or in-joke into other subs or sites, or show another sub what the room is doing.
• T3-093 playing with granted moderator powers (rare): Every member is made a moderator for April Fools, and members play with the powers and with losing them.
• T3-095 testing others' April Fools claims: Members work out whether a claim they did not make is an April Fools joke: a moderators' or company's announcement, a public figure's post, a news story, another room's claim, or real news taken for a joke.
• T3-097 switching off the prank styling: Members get past the sub's April Fools look or rules: turning the style off, working around it, reporting what it breaks, asking for it gone, or the moderators switching it back.
• T3-100 keeping April Fools changes afterwards: Members ask that something made for April Fools outlive the day: the sub's flairs, styling or name, or a company's joke feature made real.

G02 the sub's rules and usual posts

• T3-015 routing canvas posts into megathreads: Moderators or members gather the sub's canvas talk into one stickied thread, a megathread, and send other canvas posts there.
• T3-017 carrying on ordinary sub talk: The sub's ordinary business goes on during the canvas week: its usual subject, news, help, jokes and quarrels, apart from the canvas and April Fools.
• T3-051 pushing posts up the rankings: Members ask for upvotes so a post, an image or a joke climbs: up r/place or the front page so placers see it, or to the top of a search result.
• T3-053 spelling slogans with post titles: Members post a run of posts whose titles, read down the front page or the sub's listing, spell a slogan or a chant.
• T3-063 removing canvas posts by rule: Moderators, or their bots, remove, filter or flair canvas posts under the sub's standing rules, and members ask about or contest the removals.
• T3-075 objecting to the canvas flood: Members object that canvas posts crowd out the sub's usual talk, and ask for them to stop, be condensed or move.
• T3-106 calling a network boycott (rare): Members answer a TV network's April Fools prank by calling for a boycott: piracy, cancelled subscriptions, complaints.
• T3-110 placing a tile as payment: A member offers to place a canvas tile in return for an upvote or a favour.
• T3-133 recovering a hacked sub (rare): The moderators recover the sub after a moderator's account is hacked and used to change it.
• T3-140 moderators disowning the canvas work: The sub's moderators say the canvas work is not the sub's: members may go on, but not in the sub's name.
• T3-184 pausing the sub's usual events: The sub puts one of its recurring events on hold for the canvas and resumes it after.
• T3-185 changing the sub's posting rules: Moderators change the sub's posting rules around the canvas or April Fools, and members argue the change.

G03 where the planning happens

• T3-014 moving planning into a chat: The room moves its canvas planning into a chat outside the thread (a Discord most often; IRC, Skype, Telegram, Slack), setting it up, sharing invites and sending members there.
• T3-049 complaining the calls are scattered: Members complain that the room's calls and plans are scattered, duplicated or uncoordinated, and ask for one clear plan.
• T3-090 opening a canvas sub: Members open a separate subreddit for the room's canvas work, or ask for one, and send canvas talk there.
• T3-107 keeping planning in the thread: Members keep the canvas planning in the Reddit thread instead of a chat.
• T3-109 arguing which chat to use: Members argue over which chat to organise in, or whether to use one at all: Discord, IRC, Slack, an official or an unofficial server.
• T3-114 disputing the chat's authority: Members dispute whether the chat may decide for the room: who speaks there, who is left out, whether its plans bind the thread.
• T3-116 hiding the plan from rivals: Members hide the room's plan from rivals who read the thread: private messages, their own language, codes.
• T3-132 spying in a rival's chat: Members watch a rival room's chat from inside, or an outsider watches theirs, and report what they see.
• T3-152 announcing what the chat decided: Members bring the chat's decisions back to the thread: the plan agreed, a change authorised, where to place next.
• T3-153 meeting other rooms in chat: Members meet other rooms in chats (their own, the other's or a shared council) to talk terms, borders or joint work.

G04 calling people in to place

• T3-002 calling members in to place: Members call the room's own members to come and place for its work: to start, build, finish or hold a picture, calls to placers who are not yet a group included.
• T3-044 recruiting canvas visitors: The room's mark on the canvas brings outsiders to the sub; members welcome them, advertise the sub on the canvas for it, or count the newcomers.
• T3-062 recruiting kindred subs to help: Members take the room's call into other subs, mostly kindred ones (sister, regional, related fandoms), to bring more hands to the room's work.
• T3-104 cheering the builders on: Members and passers-by cheer those placing: praise, encouragement and good wishes while the work goes on.
• T3-129 making passers-by notice a demand: Members use the canvas to put a demand before passers-by: a wanted comeback, a new season, a sauce.
• T3-144 recruiting quietly to avoid attackers (rare): Members recruit only inside friendly communities and keep the work small, so that it draws no attackers.
• T3-159 rewarding helpers with prizes: Members reward those who helped the work with prizes: gold, medals, game codes, giveaways.
• T3-189 fearing newcomers the mark draws: Members fear what the canvas mark will bring into the sub: an influx of newcomers who do not read the rules or swamp the community.
• T3-196 drawing lapsed fans back: The room's mark on the canvas brings former fans back to the community; members welcome them or hope it will.

G05 telling placers what to place

• T3-034 asking for coordinates and instructions: Members ask where and how to place: coordinates, instructions, what to do with their pixel.
• T3-066 putting decisions to a vote: A choice about the work is put to the room: a vote, a strawpoll, a call to decide together.
• T3-070 sharing coordinates, templates and how-to: Members circulate what placers need to reproduce the work: coordinates, templates, grids, guides, colour, border and timing plans, and how-to.
• T3-091 keeping everyone on one template: Members hold the room to one official design or plan, against versions and placers that stray.
• T3-101 putting one member in charge: The room puts one member, or a few, in charge of the work, or members ask for someone in charge.
• T3-103 dividing the picture among teams: The work is divided: teams, colours, rows or areas of the picture assigned to members.
• T3-125 saying the room wings it: Members say the room has no plan or group: it goes with the flow, individuals placing on their own.
• T3-141 covering the night shift: Members keep the work through the night and across time zones: night watches, the work handed to another continent while they sleep.
• T3-167 timing a mass placement together: Members set a time to place together so that many pixels land at once.

G06 strain, doubt and giving up

• T3-036 judging the canvas too full: Members judge that the canvas is too full, or too far gone, for the room to join.
• T3-059 urging others to give up: Members tell the room, or its defenders, to give the work up: it is lost, over, not worth the fight.
• T3-074 working around the timer: Members work around the one-pixel cooldown, too few hands and placing troubles while they build.
• T3-098 questioning the room's canvas presence: Members ask whether and how the room shows on the canvas: why it is absent, whether a work counts as the room's, how it compares with other rooms.
• T3-124 weighing fighting against moving: Members weigh, after a loss or under pressure, whether to fight for the spot, rebuild it there, or move elsewhere.
• T3-136 doubting the room's strength: Members doubt that the room has the people or strength for a work: too few, too small, outnumbered, the work impossible.
• T3-181 quitting the effort under strain: Members quit the canvas work themselves: tired, stressed, beaten by scripts or rivals, or at odds with the room.

G07 choosing what to make and where

• T3-004 settling the mark's design: Members work out what the mark should look like (picture, colours, size, lettering, details) and correct it against the plan.
• T3-020 choosing a canvas spot: Members look for and choose where on the canvas the mark goes: open space, a corner, beside kindred marks, a new location.
• T3-033 proposing the room's mark: A member offers the room an idea of what to make on the canvas, and calls the room to make it.
• T3-055 reshaping the mark against tampering: Members change the mark's shape to make it harder to tamper with: borders, boxes, outlines, enlarging or compacting it, dropping parts easily griefed.
• T3-077 animating the mark in timelapse (rare): Members plan a mark that moves or flashes when the canvas is watched as a timelapse.
• T3-092 making a tribute alone: One member makes a small mark for the room, or for someone they admire, on their own and reports it, often asking others to keep it.
• T3-160 building memorials to the dead: Members make or protect memorials on the canvas to people who died: musicians, drivers, relatives, the victims of a disaster.
• T3-169 signing the sub's name: Members put the sub's name on or beside the work: r/name, a sign, a label.
• T3-191 leaving the work unsigned (rare): Members leave the sub's name off the work, so that it draws no attackers or because the builders are not the sub's.
• T3-197 heeding the creator's wishes (rare): The room shapes its canvas work around what the creator of its subject wants: the creator's name kept off, canvas talk moved out of the creator's way.

G08 building and growing the mark

• T3-003 reporting one's own placing labour: Members report their own part in the placing: what they placed, fixed or defended, and when.
• T3-026 announcing the mark is up: Members announce that the room's mark is on the canvas: 'we got on r/place', with a picture or its place.
• T3-038 building and reporting the mark: Members build the mark and report its progress: started, half done, almost there, the next part.
• T3-041 extending the room's work: The room adds pieces to its work or enlarges it: a second picture, another album, a bigger logo, details around the first.
• T3-042 choosing upkeep over expansion: The room puts keeping what it holds before growing: maintain, clean, defend first, no new fronts.
• T3-060 adding a personal piece: Members add their own piece to a mark many share: a word, a heart, a drug's name, a character.
• T3-069 concentrating effort on fewer pieces: The room drops or pauses some of its pieces to put its pixels on one: one priority, one attack point, the rest abandoned.
• T3-082 finding the room's mark placed: Members find a mark of their room already on the canvas, made by others or without them, and point to it.
• T3-175 adopting a sign others began: The room adopts as its own a sign others began: a neighbour's character made a mascot, a stray symbol claimed.
• T3-187 handing the work over: A member who led the work hands it to the community: maintainership passed on, the project kept community-run, a leader stepping down.

G09 defending and repairing the work

• T3-005 defending the work against attackers: Members rally to defend the room's work against an attack under way: alarms, calls to fight back and hold, reports of attacks staved off.
• T3-007 urging repair over retaliation (rare): After an attack, members urge the room to repair its work rather than strike back.
• T3-008 messaging individual placers to stop: Members contact individual placers who damage the work, by private message or by name, and ask them to stop or tell them the plan.
• T3-021 watching and repairing the work: Members keep watch over the room's work and repair it: fixing changed and stray pixels, cleaning, keeping it intact over hours.
• T3-022 relocating after losing the spot: After the work is erased or overrun, the room moves it: a new spot, a smaller version elsewhere, starting again.
• T3-139 pleading with attackers to stop: Members ask the room or group damaging their work to stop or spare it: 'please don't destroy our logo'.

G10 finding who changed the work

• T3-058 blaming attackers after the close: After the canvas closes, members blame the room that destroyed or attacked their work, and keep the grievance alive.
• T3-087 tracing who changed the work: Members work out who changed their work or who sent a call: checking placers, naming rooms, reading signs of bots or scripts.
• T3-118 blaming moderators for a loss: Members blame the sub's moderators, or the site's admins, for a loss: their prank, their removals, help they denied, a rigged game.
• T3-121 excluding the room's own vandals: The room sanctions its own members who damage the work or the room by exclusion: bans from the chat or sub, kicking, shunning, calling them traitors.
• T3-126 disputing who speaks for rooms: Members dispute who may speak or decide for a room toward others: false claims to be its moderator or representative, denials of being one, outsiders told not to decide for its work, no one yet able to speak for the placers.
• T3-170 mistaking friendly work for vandalism: Members find that what looked like vandalism was friendly work or their own mistake, and own or forgive it.
• T3-188 disowning placers outside the plan: An organised room tells others that placers acting in its name or against its plan are not under its control: rogues, the hivemind, individuals outside its chat.
• T3-192 griefing the work for fun: Members grief a work for fun, the room's own or another's, and own it or joke about it.

G11 scripts, bots and extra accounts

• T3-027 arguing whether scripts are fair: Members argue whether scripts and bots are fair: cheating or common practice, against the spirit of the canvas or the only way to hold ground.
• T3-028 running scripts for the work: Members write, share and run scripts or bots that place or keep the room's work.
• T3-088 placing beyond the pixel limit: Members place more than the one-pixel limit allows: extra accounts, alts, throwaway accounts, glitches used to place more.
• T3-089 switching off stale scripts: Members find the room's own scripts fighting its plan (old versions, wrong templates) and switch them off or update them.
• T3-108 sharing one bot target: Rooms pool one bot map or target so that a shared script keeps several rooms' works.
• T3-120 lending accounts to a bot: Members lend their accounts or machines to a bot, another room's or their own room's.
• T3-168 editing scripts to spare neighbours: Members change the room's script so it spares a neighbour: a border left untouched, overlapping pixels removed, a shared image.
• T3-176 planting disguised scripts on rivals: Members plant a script on a rival that secretly works against it: the rival's own script modified to cover its logo, a psyop to sow distrust.

G12 attacking others' work

• T3-006 calling to deface rivals' work: Members call for, plan or carry out attacks that destroy, black out or erase another room's work.
• T3-061 pushing into a neighbour's space: The room grows its own work into space a neighbour holds: expanding over another flag or picture, taking a neighbour's ground.
• T3-067 trading away another room's work (rare): In a deal with a neighbour, a room offers to remove a third room's work.
• T3-068 converting a neighbour's art: Members turn another room's art into the room's own sign: a logo changed into theirs, a flag recoloured into the room's flag, a symbol rewritten.
• T3-128 relaying a streamer's attack call (rare): Members relay a streamer's call for the audience to attack another work, and join it.
• T3-178 brigading one person off Reddit: Members propose or join harassing one person on another site: spamming an Instagram account, screwing with an actor on Twitter.

G13 holding back from others' work

• T3-024 refusing to cover others' work: Members keep the room's work off others' art: going around it, sparing it, sizing the work so it does not cover a neighbour.
• T3-039 yielding space when asked: The room gives ground when a neighbour asks: moving, shifting or shrinking its work, giving a spot back.
• T3-040 apologizing to neighbours for damage: Members apologise to a neighbouring room for damage the room or its members did to its work, often offering to help repair it.
• T3-046 arguing whether covering is fair: Members argue whether covering others' work is fair: an open canvas where anything goes, or a wrong done to others' effort.
• T3-076 reining in the room's attackers: Members tell their own room's attackers to stop: no more attacks, leave the neighbours alone, stop vandalising.
• T3-102 defying the call for restraint: A member goes on attacking or breaks a treaty after the room told them to hold back.
• T3-123 refusing to give up space: Members refuse to give up the room's space when a neighbour asks or presses: 'this is our space', 'we were here first', 'it stays'.
• T3-183 mourning art the room covered: Members mourn or regret art that their own room's work covered.

G14 space and help between rooms

• T3-010 settling borders with neighbours: Neighbouring rooms settle lines, overlaps, moves and spots between their works: borders drawn, a shift of a pixel or two, space shared.
• T3-011 helping another room's work: Members send their pixels to another room's work: helping build, finish or defend it, with nothing asked in return.
• T3-012 granting a neighbour room: The room grants a neighbour space on or beside its work: permission to build in its area, room made in its design.
• T3-035 asking a host for space: Members ask a room that holds space (a host, a faction, a neighbour) for room to build.
• T3-045 arguing who was there first: Members argue which room was at a spot first, with claims, timestamps and accusations of stealing.
• T3-071 letting neighbours adopt the work: A room lets a neighbour take its work into theirs, and thanks them for keeping it.
• T3-084 asking other rooms for help: A room asks another canvas room, as a group, to help with its work: to build, defend or repair it.
• T3-094 disputing who approves a spot: Members dispute whether a room needs another's approval to build, and who may give it.
• T3-099 relying on a bigger neighbour: A small room relies on a bigger neighbour to protect its work, or seeks such protection.
• T3-115 turning away another room's request: Members refuse another room's request for help, space or a cause.
• T3-137 joining an outside group's build: Members put their pixels into another group's build as their own effort: joining the Void, following another sub's plan, all pixels to another room's territory.
• T3-162 vetting others' requests to build: A host room rules on others' requests to build in its space: approvals, denials, conditions, published rules.

G15 pacts and envoys between rooms

• T3-030 disputing how an alliance went: Members dispute an alliance's conduct or worth, often after the close: who kept their word, betrayal, never again.
• T3-047 making up with another sub: Two subs settle a quarrel: apologies, thanks and good wishes exchanged.
• T3-083 negotiating across a language gap: Members deal with another room across a language gap: translating, machine translation, too little of the language to negotiate.
• T3-119 turning attackers into helpers: A room that attacked a work, or members of it, turn to help repair it.
• T3-122 sending greetings to another room: Members send greetings, compliments and thanks to another room with no deal attached.
• T3-138 staying neutral between two rooms: A room keeps out of a fight between others or declares neutrality, or a member is torn between two rooms.
• T3-149 agreeing truces with rival rooms: Rooms already in contact end or forestall a fight with a truce: peace asked for, offered, agreed, honoured.
• T3-150 forming alliances between rooms: Rooms join in an alliance for joint defence or a joint fight: alliances named, proposed, joined.
• T3-151 bartering help with neighbours: Rooms trade help: repairs, defence, maintenance or room given in return for the same.
• T3-161 mediating between other rooms (rare): A member acts as go-between for two other rooms.
• T3-193 arguing whether cooperation is surrender: Members argue whether cooperating with another room, or accepting a treaty, is surrender.
• T3-194 acting as envoys between rooms: A member acts for a room toward another room: envoy, diplomat, ambassador, representative, a proposal carried between threads.
• T3-195 holding rooms to their agreements: Members invoke an agreement already made: its terms spread to placers, the room reminded to honour it, a neighbour accused of breach, a lapsed deal restored.

G16 kindred rooms and colour factions

• T3-013 gathering kindred rooms together: Kindred rooms (a league's teams, a region's subs, sister fandoms) gather their canvas work in one hub sub or chat.
• T3-019 tallying kindred rooms' works: Members count which kindred rooms (teams, schools, bands) made it onto the canvas and which were lost.
• T3-056 making joint marks with others: Two or more rooms make one mark together: a shared design, a combined flag, lettering finished for each other.
• T3-096 hailing the colour corners: Members of other subs cheer the colour corners and factions, or call people to their side.
• T3-163 defecting from a rival faction: Members announce that they have left a rival faction and joined this one.
• T3-171 spreading a faction's colour: A colour faction spreads its colour across the canvas: expanding the corner, covering others with its colour, tendrils and cores.
• T3-172 renewing the order's oaths: A canvas-born order lays down or renews its rules, oaths and membership.
• T3-173 holding elections for office: A canvas-born faction holds elections for its leaders and offices.
• T3-174 professing loyalty to a colour: A colour faction's members profess loyalty to it: hails, slogans, propaganda, the colour as faith or empire.
• T3-190 splitting a faction over doctrine: A canvas faction splits over what it stands for: pure colour or art, erasing or cleaning, the void or coexistence.

G17 nations and their flags

• T3-065 building the homeland's flag: The room makes the flag of its nation, state or region its mark: calling hands to it, building, sizing and fixing it. A flag built in a room named for a land is that land's flag unless its concepts name another.
• T3-078 helping kin nations' flags: Members help the flags of kindred nations or regions: Baltic brothers, neighbours, a diaspora's homeland.
• T3-079 joining flags with a heart: Rooms join their national flags with a heart or another sign of friendship.
• T3-085 weighing the room against nations: Members weigh the room's art against the nations' flags on the canvas: flags called bland or too big, a nation's size claimed as a right to space.
• T3-113 drawing national emblems: Members draw their nation's emblems, figures and symbols beside or inside the flag: monuments, animals, the king's name, a coat of arms.
• T3-145 feeling national through the canvas: Members feel and voice national belonging through the canvas work: pride in the flag, a nation standing together, fighting for it from abroad.
• T3-165 debating friendship with historic enemies: Members argue whether canvas friendship with a historic national enemy means anything, or should exist at all.
• T3-180 disputing national belonging: Members dispute who belongs to the nation or region and who may speak or act for it on the canvas.

G18 politics, history and hate symbols

• T3-080 arguing over political symbols: Members argue over a political or religious symbol on the canvas: what it means, whether it belongs, whether to take it down.
• T3-081 casting fights as national history: Members cast canvas fights as their nations' historic wars: invasions repeated, old battles and songs replayed, occupation recalled.
• T3-086 carrying in the sub's quarrel: A community's own quarrel or rivalry is carried onto the canvas: one faction's slogan pushed over the other's, the rivalry fought in pixels.
• T3-130 reading national politics in pixels: Members read their nation's politics into the canvas: referendums, elections, governments, migration, old regimes.
• T3-142 making ethnic jokes about rivals: Members mock rival nations or peoples with ethnic jokes and slurs during the canvas fights.
• T3-146 covering swastikas and hate symbols: Members cover swastikas, Nazi flags and other hate symbols or slurs placed on or near their work, or call others to.
• T3-166 arguing the nation's historical record (rare): Members argue whether their nation has always been on the right side of history.
• T3-177 calling to draw swastikas: Members call for, or take part in, drawing swastikas and Nazi imagery on the canvas, the room's own logo included.
• T3-179 arguing ideology from the canvas: Members argue political ideology from the canvas: socialism, capitalism, anarchism, consensus, read into how the canvas was made.
• T3-182 shutting down bigotry in chat: Members or moderators shut down bigoted speech in the room's thread or chat: slurs removed, a speaker shut down, racist claims answered.

G19 taunts and victories over rivals

• T3-025 placing rival marks together (rare): A room puts its mark beside a rival's and keeps both standing without a war.
• T3-050 trading taunts with rivals: Members trade taunts, threats and mockery with a rival community over the canvas.
• T3-134 flooding rivals' threads with chants: Members flood a rival's thread with a chant or refrain: the Void's creed, a streamer's victory chorus, 'get gooned'.
• T3-135 telling clashes as fandom lore: Members retell the canvas clashes in their fandom's own terms: as the game's battles, the show's factions, the band's season.
• T3-143 judging whether a joke offends: Members argue whether a taunt or joke about the canvas goes too far: racist, cruel or just a joke.
• T3-154 claiming victory over rival rooms: Members claim victory over rival rooms: outlasting them, defending against bigger subs, defeating them.
• T3-155 saluting rivals after the fight: Members salute their rivals once the fight is over: well played, good game, thanks for playing.

G20 looking at the canvas and its worth

• T3-016 explaining what the canvas is: Members ask or explain what the canvas event is, why it is everywhere and how anyone places a pixel.
• T3-018 decoding the finished picture's details: Members work out or explain what a particular picture or detail on the canvas shows, means or refers to.
• T3-031 playing the room's in-jokes: Members play the room's own memes, catchphrases and running jokes in the canvas talk.
• T3-037 arguing the canvas's worth: Members argue whether the canvas, its fights or the time spent on it are worth anything.
• T3-052 remarking on neighbouring pictures: Members remark among themselves on the pictures beside or around their own mark.
• T3-057 remaking canvas art elsewhere: Members remake the canvas work or its fights in other media: Minecraft, LEGO, fan art, wallpapers, memes.
• T3-112 entering the work in atlases: Members get the room's work entered in a shared atlas, wiki or list of canvas works.
• T3-127 seeking the creators' notice: Members hope or ask that the fandom's creators, streamer, team or staff notice the canvas work, and celebrate when they do.
• T3-131 arguing over selling canvas art: Members argue over someone selling prints, posters or templates of the shared canvas work.
• T3-147 sharing the work's press coverage: Members share or remark on press, news or viral coverage that showed the room's work.

G21 after the canvas closed

• T3-009 celebrating the finished work: Members mark the room's own finished or nearly finished work as achieved: we did it, pride, congratulations, the final image.
• T3-029 mourning the lost work: Members grieve for the room's work, or a work they cared for, once it is covered, erased or left unfinished.
• T3-043 crediting who made the work: Members thank or credit the people who made, defended or perfected the work, or claim their own part in it.
• T3-054 carrying work to new canvases: Members take up or turn down a later canvas: rebuilding there, planning for next time, or declining to start again.
• T3-072 thanking the room's allies: Members thank other rooms that helped and tell the story of who stood with the room.
• T3-073 reporting how the work fared: Members report what happened to the work, live or after the close: what was covered, moved, repaired or survived.
• T3-105 saving screenshots and timelapses: Members save or share the work as it stood: screenshots, timelapses, final images, requests to save it before it changes.
• T3-111 repurposing the canvas sub: Members decide what the sub or chat made for the canvas becomes once the canvas closes.
• T3-117 marking the canvas's end: Members register that the canvas has ended: it's over, regret, signing off, hoping it returns.
• T3-148 imagining art the canvas missed: Members imagine art the canvas never held: what the work was meant to look like, what they would have drawn.
• T3-156 adopting the mark as emblem: Members take the canvas mark into the sub's identity: banner, sidebar, flair, avatar or a room joke.
• T3-157 reflecting on working together: Members say what the shared effort meant: strangers cooperating, the community as the point.
• T3-158 proposing ties beyond the canvas: Members carry a tie with another room past the canvas: trading recommendations, crossovers, sister cities, exchanges.
• T3-164 feeling supported through the canvas: Members find support, visibility or comfort through the canvas: a flag that says 'we are here', not being alone.
• T3-186 celebrating the feat in person (rare): A member invites others to meet in person to celebrate the canvas work.

G01 April Fools in the sub

T3-001 staging April Fools fake news

Members post their own April Fools fakes in the sub as if true (news, leaks, patches, releases, claims) and play along with them, fall for them or reveal them. Floor: trees and metalcore, unlike in size (trees holds 20,798 items in the window and metalcore 2,087, over twice as many).

• Must show: Members of the room themselves post something false as true for April Fools (a fake news story, leak, patch, release, announcement, trade or personal claim), or reply inside such a fake: playing along, being caught, revealing it.
• Must not show: A change to the sub itself staged by the moderators or the sub (T3-023); a joke made by the company, creator or organisation the sub follows (T3-048); members testing a claim the theme did not stage (T3-095).
• Decide when both: When a theme both stages fakes and tests claims from elsewhere, T3-001 if most concepts make or play inside the room's own fakes, T3-095 if most weigh an outside claim; objecting to the jokes in three or more concepts adds T3-032.
• Against T3-095: Did members of this room stage the claim? Yes: T3-001, the replies inside it included. It came from the moderators, the company, a public figure, the news or another room: T3-095.
• Against T3-023: Is the joke the sub's own changed state (its name, look, rules, subject or a staged takeover)? T3-023. Is it a member's post claiming something false inside the sub? T3-001.
• Against T3-048: Whose joke is it: the room's members (T3-001), or the game's company, the show's creator, an official channel or organisation (T3-048)?
• Against T3-031: Is the joke a fake posted as true for April Fools (T3-001), or the room's ordinary in-jokes and memes on any day (T3-031)?
• Against T3-017: Is anything posted as a fake for April Fools (T3-001), or are the posts ordinary (T3-017)?
• Varies: From one fake headline to a run of fake patch notes and leaks; from members who stay in character to members who reveal at once; from fooling the room to readers admitting they were caught.
• Is not: Members proposing pranks to play on friends away from the site: nothing is staged in the room, so it is the sub's usual talk (T3-017).
• Exemplars: "... nah not really, happy April 1st every one XD" (metalcore c0106); "April Fool's joke. OP is actually eating edibles. One for every upvote!" (trees c0217, rivals c0083); "Following the great reveal on Discord that I was faking, naw I actually do enjoy April Fool's quite a bit." (touhou c0037)

T3-023 running an April Fools takeover

The sub is turned into something else for April Fools, by its moderators or by the sub as a body (renamed, restyled, given new rules or a new subject, or one sub's joke raid on another), and members play inside it. Floor: zelda and patriots, unlike in size (zelda holds 9,309 items in the window and patriots 3,987, over twice as many).

• Must show: A change made to a whole sub for April Fools, announced or staged by its moderators or by a sub acting together: a new name, look, subject, rules or flairs, a fake sale or takeover by a character, company or rival sub, or one sub taking over another for the day; and members playing along inside it.
• Must not show: Members' own fake posts in an unchanged sub (T3-001); working out whether the change is a joke (T3-095); only complaining about the jokes (T3-032) or turning the styling off (T3-097).
• Decide when both: Playing along inside the takeover stays T3-023. Working out what the change was in three or more concepts adds T3-095; objecting in three or more adds T3-032; turning off or working around the look adds T3-097; asking to keep it after the day adds T3-100.
• Against T3-001: Is the joke the sub's changed state (T3-023), or a member's fake post inside the sub (T3-001)?
• Against T3-095: Are members playing inside the change (T3-023), or trying to tell whether the change is real and what it is (T3-095)?
• Against T3-097: Is the look being staged or played with (T3-023), or turned off, worked around or asked away (T3-097)?
• Against T3-093: Are moderator powers handed to every member and played with (T3-093), or is it any other takeover (T3-023)?
• Against T3-064: Is the target sub changed as a whole, as the joke's stage (T3-023), or do members carry the room's joke into other places one post at a time (T3-064)?
• Against T3-048: Is the joke the maker's (T3-048), or the sub's own moderators' change to the sub, even when they play the maker (T3-023)?
• Against T3-133: Is the change a joke the moderators staged (T3-023), or a real compromise they repair (T3-133)?
• Against T3-185: Is the rule change a joke for the day (T3-023), or meant to hold (T3-185)?
• Against T3-032: Is the sub turned into something else for the day and played inside (T3-023), or are the sub's April Fools jokes objected to and asked to stop (T3-032)?
• Against T3-100: Is the sub turned into something else for the day (T3-023), or is it asked that an April Fools change outlive the day (T3-100)?
• Varies: From a one-day styling swap to a full change of subject with removals enforced; from the moderators alone to a whole sub raiding another sub as a joke.
• Is not: A moderator removing canvas posts under the sub's ordinary rules on 1 April (T3-063): nothing about the sub was changed for the joke.
• Exemplars: "After many years of hard work on this sub, we've decided it's time to cash in! So we've sold the subreddit to Funko!" (gameofthrones c0007); "Annoucement: We received an intellectual property related cease and desist letter from the NFL's legal team today. Starting noon today, all football gifs are banned from r/Patriots." (patriots c0042); "What's the point in doing a joke like this without fully committing? It's not like we're getting rid of a place for people to talk about what they want to talk about, /r/horizon is currently a zelda subreddit." (zelda c0130)

T3-032 objecting to April Fools posts

Members object to the April Fools jokes in their sub as unfunny, stale, hurtful or in the way, and ask for them to stop or come down. Floor: europe and fivenightsatfreddys, unlike in size (europe holds 29,726 items in the window and fivenightsatfreddys 9,633, over twice as many).

• Must show: Objection to the sub's April Fools content carried by three or more concepts: calling the jokes unfunny, stale, hurtful or disruptive; asking members or moderators to stop them or take them down; warning others not to post them.
• Must not show: One or two passing complaints inside a theme about the jokes (named in the room note, not placed); complaints that the prank styling is hard to read (T3-097); objections to canvas posts (T3-075).
• Decide when both: A theme that stages or plays the jokes and objects to them keeps the staging kind as primary and adds T3-032 when the objecting has three or more concepts.
• Against T3-075: Are the posts objected to April Fools jokes (T3-032) or canvas posts flooding the sub (T3-075)?
• Against T3-097: Are the jokes themselves bad or unwelcome (T3-032), or is the joke look in the way of reading and voting (T3-097)?
• Against T3-063: Are members objecting (T3-032), or moderators removing posts under the sub's rules (T3-063)?
• Against T3-048: Is the objection to posts in the sub (T3-032), or a verdict on the company's or creator's own joke (T3-048)?
• Against T3-118: Is the moderators' joke objected to as a joke (T3-032), or blamed for a loss (T3-118)?
• Against T3-143: Are April Fools posts objected to (T3-032), or a canvas joke's limits argued (T3-143)?
• Against T3-023: Is the sub turned into something else for the day and played inside (T3-023), or are the sub's April Fools jokes objected to and asked to stop (T3-032)?
• Varies: From a sigh at a stale joke to calls for the moderators to undo a takeover; hurt at a joke about a nation, a language or a death.
• Is not: A member disliking the game company's April Fools feature (T3-048): the objection is to the maker's joke, not to posts in the sub.
• Exemplars: "This April fools' joke is in really poor taste. Hate towards a particular country and language is not a joke." (europe c0453); "Stop with these Kimi posts, they are getting boring fast" (formula1 c0203); "I forsee many of these 'jokes' coming, so as a PSA and if your reading, please do not make these posts." (fivenightsatfreddys c0166)

T3-048 reacting to official April Fools

Members react to the April Fools jokes of the company, creator, channel or organisation the sub follows: waiting for them, judging them, comparing years, missing them. Floor: overwatch and paydaytheheist, unlike in size (overwatch holds 45,381 items in the window and paydaytheheist 2,417, over twice as many).

• Must show: Talk about an April Fools joke made by the maker the sub is about (a game company's patch, trailer, store item or mode; a creator's or channel's video; a club's, school's or organisation's post): anticipating it, judging it, comparing it with other years, wishing for one, missing one.
• Must not show: An open question whether an announcement is a joke at all (T3-095); members' own fakes (T3-001); asking for the joke feature to stay after the day (T3-100).
• Decide when both: Judging the official joke stays T3-048. When most concepts ask whether an announcement is real, T3-095; asking to keep the joke feature in three or more concepts adds T3-100.
• Against T3-095: Is it still open whether the announcement is a joke (T3-095), or is the joke known and members judge it (T3-048)?
• Against T3-001: Is the joke the official maker's (T3-048) or the room's members' (T3-001)?
• Against T3-100: Reacting to the joke on the day (T3-048), or asking for it to stay or be made real after the day (T3-100)?
• Against T3-023: Is the joke the maker's (T3-048), or the sub's own moderators' change to the sub, even when they play the maker (T3-023)?
• Against T3-032: Is the objection to posts in the sub (T3-032), or a verdict on the company's or creator's own joke (T3-048)?
• Against T3-106: Do members only judge the maker's joke (T3-048), or call for action against the maker (T3-106)?
• Varies: From disappointment that a company made no joke this year to praise for a well-made fake update; companies, streamers, channels, clubs and universities.
• Is not: The sub's moderators staging a fake takeover by the company (T3-023): the moderators are not the company.
• Exemplars: "Blizzard usually goes all out for all their games, but this year it doesn't seem that way." (overwatch c0472, rivals c0766); "Gaijin is memeing on a whole new level" (warthunder c0006); "This year's April Fools update however, it was pretty amazing." (paydaytheheist c0103)

T3-064 spreading the room's joke elsewhere

Members carry their sub's joke or in-joke into other subs or sites, or show another sub what the room is doing. Floor: prequelmemes and totallynotrobots, unlike in size (prequelmemes holds 11,884 items in the window and totallynotrobots 1,288, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's own joke (an April Fools takeover, an in-joke, a meme, a birthday flood) taken by members into another sub or site: posting it there, linking it into other subs, showing another sub what the room is doing, comparing the room's joke with other subs'.
• Must not show: A takeover of the room's own sub (T3-023); calls to other subs for canvas help (T3-062).
• Decide when both: One sub changing another sub as a whole for the day is T3-023; members carrying the joke into other places post by post is T3-064.
• Against T3-023: Is another sub taken over as the joke's stage (T3-023), or do members carry the joke into other places (T3-064)?
• Against T3-031: Is the in-joke played inside the room (T3-031), or taken out to other subs (T3-064)?
• Against T3-062: Does the message to another sub carry the room's joke (T3-064), or ask that sub for help on the canvas (T3-062)?
• Varies: From one link to another sub to a coordinated flood of birthday wishes across subs; from pride in the joke's reach to worry that another sub's joke is everywhere.
• Is not: Recruiting kindred subs to help with the canvas (T3-062): no joke is carried.
• Exemplars: "IT WOULD BE VERY INTERESTING TO USE THIS IDEA IN OTHER SUBS. WE ARE REAL HUMANS, BUT THEY WILL THINK WE ARE ROBOTS." (totallynotrobots c0005, rivals c0013); "Posted what we were doing here to the Love Live Reddit" (stardustcrusaders c0088); "When r/movies becomes r/prequelmemes for the day" (prequelmemes c0239, rivals c0209 c0327)

T3-093 playing with granted moderator powers

Rare tier. Every member is made a moderator for April Fools, and members play with the powers and with losing them.

• Must show: Moderator status handed to every member (or to many) for the day, and members playing with it: threats to ban or sticky, jokes about ruling, talk when the powers are withdrawn.
• Must not show: Any other takeover in which the moderators keep their powers (T3-023).
• Decide when both: The moderators' staging of the handout sits with T3-023; members' play with the powers goes to T3-093.
• Against T3-023: Do members hold moderator powers and play with them (T3-093), or do they play inside a change the moderators made (T3-023)?
• Against T3-133: Members playing with powers handed out for the day (T3-093), or a stolen account undone (T3-133)?
• Varies: From jokes about banning the real moderators to a mock mutiny once the powers end.
• Is not: A real election or appointment of moderators for the canvas work (T3-173, T3-101).
• Exemplars: "Unfortunately you can't ban other moderators, so really no one has any power!" (seahawks c0015, rivals c0031 c0023); "How do I ban all the other mods so I can be the only mod?" (seahawks c0031, rivals c0015 c0023); "At least I look good in moderator green." (seahawks c0023, rivals c0015 c0031)

T3-095 testing others' April Fools claims

Members work out whether a claim they did not make is an April Fools joke: a moderators' or company's announcement, a public figure's post, a news story, another room's claim, or real news taken for a joke. Floor: DestinyTheGame and loltyler1, unlike in size (DestinyTheGame holds 45,483 items in the window and loltyler1 1,815, over twice as many).

• Must show: Members asking or settling whether something the theme did not stage is real or a joke: checking the date and the source, pointing to evidence, warning others, confirming or exposing.
• Must not show: The room's own fakes and the replies inside them, readers caught by them included (T3-001); judging an official joke already known to be one (T3-048).
• Decide when both: If the room's members staged the claim, T3-001 even when readers test it; otherwise T3-095. Where a theme holds both, the kind with more concepts is primary and the other is added under rule 0.
• Against T3-001: Did members of this room stage the claim being tested (T3-001), or did it come from elsewhere, the moderators, a company, a public figure, the news, another room (T3-095)?
• Against T3-048: Is it still open whether it is a joke (T3-095), or do members judge an official joke they know is one (T3-048)?
• Against T3-023: Are members working out what the sub's change is and whether it is real (T3-095), or playing inside it (T3-023)?
• Against T3-016: Is the claim tested whether r/place itself is Reddit's April Fools joke, answered by explaining what r/place is (T3-016), or a claim about anything else (T3-095)?
• Varies: From a single 'April Fools?' to a thread tracing a leak to its source; claims by companies, moderators, players, news sites, public figures and other rooms; real news first taken for a joke.
• Is not: Readers falling for a fake that members of the same room posted (T3-001).
• Exemplars: "Is this a joke for april fools ?? #cracktheclue" (2007scape c0357); "Confirmed fake, puzzle by Math Class, not affiliated with Bungie" (DestinyTheGame c0200); "unban was a april fools joke?" (loltyler1 c0021)

T3-097 switching off the prank styling

Members get past the sub's April Fools look or rules: turning the style off, working around it, reporting what it breaks, asking for it gone, or the moderators switching it back. Floor: clashroyale and GuildWars2, unlike in size (clashroyale holds 19,914 items in the window and GuildWars2 7,667, over twice as many).

• Must show: The sub's April Fools styling or rule change treated as something to get past: turning off the subreddit style, browser and CSS workarounds, reports that it breaks reading, voting or links, requests to switch back, the moderators ending it.
• Must not show: Playing inside the changed look (T3-023); objecting to the joke posts as unfunny (T3-032); asking to keep the change (T3-100).
• Decide when both: A theme that stages the takeover and switches it off keeps T3-023 as primary and adds T3-097 when switching off or working around has a concept of its own.
• Against T3-100: Do members want the change gone or worked around (T3-097), or kept after the day (T3-100)?
• Against T3-032: Is the look in the way (T3-097), or are the jokes themselves unwelcome (T3-032)?
• Against T3-023: Is the change being staged or played (T3-023), or got rid of (T3-097)?
• Varies: From a reader's browser trick to the moderators restoring the old theme; contrast, fonts, flairs, hidden links and buttons that stop working.
• Is not: Moderators changing the sub's posting rules for good after the day (T3-185).
• Exemplars: "It's very hard to read these lol. Turn of subreddit style to get rid of it." (h3h3productions c0044); "It's harder to read and I can't find the "disable subreddit theme"" (clashroyale c0420, rivals c0361); "I found the April Fools background so annoying I turned off themes for this subreddit in Reddit's preferences and that is how it is going to stay." (GuildWars2 c0197, rivals c0176)

T3-100 keeping April Fools changes afterwards

Members ask that something made for April Fools outlive the day: the sub's flairs, styling or name, or a company's joke feature made real. Floor: rocketleague and rust, unlike in size (rocketleague holds 21,124 items in the window and rust 1,129, over twice as many).

• Must show: A request or decision that an April Fools change stay after the day: flairs, a theme, a name, a game mode, a rank set or a joke item; petitions, polls and settings asked for so that it can stay.
• Must not show: Reacting to the joke on the day (T3-048, T3-023); getting rid of the change (T3-097).
• Decide when both: Asking to keep a company's joke feature is T3-100 when the asking has a concept of its own, beside T3-048 for judging the joke.
• Against T3-097: Is the change wanted gone (T3-097) or kept (T3-100)?
• Against T3-048: Judging the official joke (T3-048), or asking that it stay or be made real (T3-100)?
• Against T3-105: Is the canvas work saved in screenshots and timelapses (T3-105), or an April Fools change kept in use (T3-100)?
• Against T3-023: Is the sub turned into something else for the day (T3-023), or is it asked that an April Fools change outlive the day (T3-100)?
• Varies: From a flair kept a few more days to petitions with thousands of votes asking a company to make a joke rank permanent.
• Is not: Asking to carry the canvas work to a successor canvas (T3-054): the canvas is no April Fools change.
• Exemplars: "Let's keep the April Fools flairs around a little longer anyway." (smashbros c0259); "THE PETITION TO KEEP THE VEGGIE RANKS" (rocketleague c0170, rivals c0560 c0614); "Mods, please keep this theme up." (rust c0026)

G02 the sub's rules and usual posts

T3-015 routing canvas posts into megathreads

Moderators or members gather the sub's canvas talk into one stickied thread, a megathread, and send other canvas posts there. Floor: heroesofthestorm and cubers, unlike in size (heroesofthestorm holds 22,813 items in the window and cubers 3,531, over twice as many).

• Must show: Canvas talk gathered into one thread inside the sub: a moderator stickying a megathread, members asking for one, posts redirected or removed with a pointer to it, the plan kept in one visible place.
• Must not show: Moving the planning out of the sub, to a chat or a new sub (T3-014, T3-090); removals under the sub's rules with no pointer to a gathering thread (T3-063); complaining about the flood without asking for a place to gather it (T3-075).
• Decide when both: Removing canvas posts and pointing them to the megathread is T3-015; removals resting on other rules (karma, titles, relevance) are T3-063. A theme with both in concepts of their own takes the larger as primary and the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-063: Is the post sent to one gathering thread (T3-015), or removed or filtered under a standing rule with no such pointer (T3-063)?
• Against T3-014: Is the gathering place a thread inside the sub (T3-015), or a chat outside it (T3-014)?
• Against T3-090: One thread in the sub (T3-015), or a new sub made for the canvas work (T3-090)?
• Against T3-075: Is one thread asked for so the work can go on in order (T3-015), or are members objecting that canvas posts crowd the sub (T3-075)?
• Against T3-049: Is the scattering complained of with no gathering act (T3-049), or is the talk gathered into one thread (T3-015)?
• Against T3-140: Is the thread only gathering canvas talk (T3-015), or do the moderators also say the work is not the sub's (T3-140)?
• Against T3-197: Is the canvas talk moved or shaped because the creator of the room's subject asked (T3-197), or gathered into one thread with no creator's wish behind it (T3-015)?
• Varies: From one moderator's sticky to dozens of posts redirected by hand; members asking for a thread that does not exist yet.
• Is not: A moderator removing a canvas post because the canvas has ended (T3-063): nothing is gathered.
• Exemplars: "Everybody, please stop creating /r/place threads on our sub. Keep your posts and ideas within this thread." (dbz c0052); "Why can't they pin 1 thread for all this /rplace stuff???" (heroesofthestorm c0318); "Please use the megathread" (cubers c0281)

T3-017 carrying on ordinary sub talk

The sub's ordinary business goes on during the canvas week: its usual subject, news, help, jokes and quarrels, apart from the canvas and April Fools. Floor: rocketleague and paydaytheheist, unlike in size (rocketleague holds 21,124 items in the window and paydaytheheist 2,417, over twice as many).

• Must show: Talk on the sub's usual subject during the window (the game, team, show, place or hobby; its news, help and arguments), or ordinary side talk inside a canvas thread, with no canvas work and no April Fools joke as its point.
• Must not show: Talk about the canvas work (other families); April Fools jokes (G01); the room's running in-jokes played in the canvas talk (T3-031).
• Decide when both: Usual talk inside a canvas or April Fools theme is named in the room note unless it holds three or more concepts of its own; then T3-017 is added under rule 0.
• Against T3-031: Is it the room's running in-joke carried into the canvas talk or the day (T3-031), or the sub's ordinary subject going on (T3-017)?
• Against T3-001: Is anything posted as a fake for April Fools (T3-001), or are the posts ordinary (T3-017)?
• Against T3-185: Are members arguing the sub's posting rules (T3-185), or talking about the sub's subject (T3-017)?
• Against T3-050: Does the sub's ordinary talk go on with no rival in it (T3-017), or is a rival community taunted (T3-050)?
• Against T3-184: Does the usual business go on (T3-017), or is a recurring event stopped or restarted around the canvas (T3-184)?
• Varies: From patch questions and match threads to a sub's politics, help requests and feuds; from whole themes of usual talk to usual talk drifting into a canvas thread.
• Is not: Members trading outside creators' April Fools releases as examples of the day done well: that is reacting to official April Fools (T3-048).
• Exemplars: "I'm glad RLCS is attractive enough to companies to have sponsors like that." (rocketleague c0648); "Uncheck all dlcs and start game, then close and re check all dlcs. Mine is now fully operational :))" (paydaytheheist c0159); "Don't know what to say but here's a virtual hug if you need it." (philippines c0031)

T3-051 pushing posts up the rankings

Members ask for upvotes so a post, an image or a joke climbs: up r/place or the front page so placers see it, or to the top of a search result. Floor: leagueoflegends and CKCrusaders, unlike in size (leagueoflegends holds 75,751 items in the window and CKCrusaders 487, over twice as many).

• Must show: A drive for votes: members asked to upvote a post so that it rises (to be seen by placers on r/place, to reach the front page, to make an image the first search result), or bargains of the form 'if this gets N upvotes'.
• Must not show: Calling members to place with no votes asked (T3-002); asking another sub for help (T3-062).
• Decide when both: A call to place that also asks for upvotes so the call is seen: T3-002 primary, T3-051 added when the vote drive has a concept of its own.
• Against T3-002: Are members asked to vote a post up (T3-051), or to come and place (T3-002)?
• Against T3-110: Is a tile offered in return for the vote (T3-110), or are votes gathered with nothing given (T3-051)?
• Against T3-053: Is one post pushed up (T3-051), or a run of posts lined up to spell a phrase (T3-053)?
• Against T3-062: Are upvotes asked so a post climbs (T3-051), or the room's call for hands carried into other subs (T3-062)?
• Varies: From one request to upvote a coordination post on r/place to joke campaigns to own a search result; pledges promised for a vote count.
• Is not: Offering to place a tile for an upvote (T3-110): the vote buys a tile.
• Exemplars: "In particular, upvote this thread so randoms will see and understand." (CKCrusaders c0040); "IceFrog. If this gets enough upvotes, this image will show up when you Google search "IceFrog"" (leagueoflegends c0289); "show up on google images when you search ya boi" (pokemon c0100)

T3-053 spelling slogans with post titles

Members post a run of posts whose titles, read down the front page or the sub's listing, spell a slogan or a chant. Floor: hearthstone and popheads, unlike in size (hearthstone holds 53,563 items in the window and popheads 4,512, over twice as many).

• Must show: Coordinated posts of single letters, words or lines timed so that the listing spells a phrase; plans to make the front page say something; praise for the result.
• Must not show: A vote drive for one post (T3-051); a chant repeated in replies without spelling anything across posts (T3-031).
• Decide when both: Posts timed to spell and upvoted so that they reach the front page: T3-053 for the spelling, T3-051 added when the vote drive has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-051: Is one post pushed up (T3-051), or a run of posts lined up to spell a phrase (T3-053)?
• Against T3-031: Is the room's chant played in replies (T3-031), or spelled across the titles of many posts (T3-053)?
• Varies: From letters spelling a name down the front page to song lyrics chained one word per post.
• Is not: Pushing one post up the rankings (T3-051).
• Exemplars: "get the front page to say" (hearthstone c0229, rivals c0075); "On my front page it took me a while to see the whole thing. Well done." (hearthstone c0075, rivals c0229)

T3-063 removing canvas posts by rule

Moderators, or their bots, remove, filter or flair canvas posts under the sub's standing rules, and members ask about or contest the removals. Floor: pcmasterrace and smashbros, unlike in size (pcmasterrace holds 40,459 items in the window and smashbros 8,519, over twice as many).

• Must show: Canvas posts handled under the sub's standing rules: removals for titles, links, karma, relevance, duplicates or politics; automatic filters; required flairs; members asking what the rules allow or contesting a removal.
• Must not show: Gathering canvas talk into one thread (T3-015); changing the rules themselves (T3-185); members objecting to the flood with no moderator act (T3-075).
• Decide when both: Removing with a pointer to a gathering thread is T3-015; removing under any other rule is T3-063; both with concepts of their own, the larger primary and the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-015: Is the post removed under a standing rule (T3-063), or sent to one gathering thread (T3-015)?
• Against T3-185: Are the rules applied as they stand (T3-063), or made, dropped or argued as a change (T3-185)?
• Against T3-075: A removal or filter applied (T3-063), or members complaining about canvas posts (T3-075)?
• Against T3-182: Posts removed for breaking the sub's rules (T3-063), or members shutting down bigotry in a chat (T3-182)?
• Against T3-121: Is a post removed under the sub's rules (T3-063), or a member excluded as a sanction (T3-121)?
• Against T3-032: Are members objecting (T3-032), or moderators removing posts under the sub's rules (T3-063)?
• Against T3-118: Is a removal contested (T3-063), or a loss laid at the moderators' door (T3-118)?
• Against T3-197: Are canvas posts handled under the sub's rules (T3-063), or shaped by the creator's wish (T3-197)?
• Against T3-140: Do moderators say the canvas work is not the sub's (T3-140), or remove or filter canvas posts under the sub's rules without saying so (T3-063)?
• Varies: From an automatic removal for an all-caps title to a moderator removing a post that ties the sub to fascism; members apologising in advance for breaking a rule.
• Is not: A moderator stickying a megathread and asking for posts there (T3-015).
• Exemplars: "Just letting you know I removed this because /r/place has ended." (smashbros c0345); "Reddiquette forbids titles written in ALL CAPS. Please fix this and resubmit your post." (pcmasterrace c0584); "Your link has been removed because it is not whitelisted." (2007scape c1423)

T3-075 objecting to the canvas flood

Members object that canvas posts crowd out the sub's usual talk, and ask for them to stop, be condensed or move. Floor: AMD and chibears, unlike in size (AMD holds 15,188 items in the window and chibears 1,957, over twice as many).

• Must show: Members complaining that r/place posts flood the sub, are spam or off-topic, or crowd out its news and subject; asking that they stop, be condensed into one post or be removed.
• Must not show: Moderators applying a rule (T3-063) or gathering posts (T3-015) with no members objecting; judging the canvas itself worthless (T3-037); objecting to April Fools posts (T3-032).
• Decide when both: Members objecting and moderators answering with a megathread: the larger part primary, the other under rule 0. A complaint that the canvas is pointless, not that it floods the sub, is T3-037.
• Against T3-037: Is the complaint that canvas posts crowd the sub (T3-075), or that the canvas is not worth doing (T3-037)?
• Against T3-032: Are the unwanted posts canvas posts (T3-075) or April Fools jokes (T3-032)?
• Against T3-015: Are members objecting to the flood (T3-075), or is the talk being gathered into one thread so the work can go on (T3-015)?
• Against T3-063: A removal or filter applied (T3-063), or members complaining about canvas posts (T3-075)?
• Against T3-189: Is the complaint about canvas posts crowding the sub (T3-075), or about the people the mark brings in (T3-189)?
• Varies: From one weary 'please stop' to threads arguing whether the canvas enlivened or wrecked the sub; refusals to join because of the spam.
• Is not: A member calling the canvas a waste of time with no word on the sub's space (T3-037).
• Exemplars: "Some fans come here to read bears news you guys are spamming this whole subreddit with this shit." (chibears c0114); "Enough with this r/place bullsh*t already. None of these things posted these last few days are even remotely related to Minecraft." (minecraft c0227); "Half the subs I'm subscribed to are flooded with this r/place garbage." (AMD c0341, rivals c0140)

T3-106 calling a network boycott

Rare tier. Members answer a TV network's April Fools prank by calling for a boycott: piracy, cancelled subscriptions, complaints.

• Must show: Calls to boycott or punish an outside company over its April Fools joke: withholding views, piracy, cancelling subscriptions, organising complaints.
• Must not show: Judging the official joke with no action against the maker (T3-048).
• Decide when both: A theme that judges the joke and calls a boycott in concepts of their own takes T3-048 as primary and T3-106 under rule 0.
• Against T3-048: Do members only judge the maker's joke (T3-048), or call for action against the maker (T3-106)?
• Varies: From one member's private piracy to a call for someone to organise a boycott.
• Is not: Objecting to joke posts inside the sub (T3-032).
• Exemplars: "I want to boycott adult swim. Who wants to organize that?" (samuraijack c0098, rivals c0099 c0154); "Adult Swim skips Jack, I cancel the subscription. Joke for a joke." (samuraijack c0169, rivals c0099 c0154); "BOYCOTT RICK AND MORTY" (samuraijack c0157, rivals c0099 c0154)

T3-110 placing a tile as payment

A member offers to place a canvas tile in return for an upvote or a favour. Floor: france and pgang, unlike in size (france holds 16,236 items in the window and pgang 8, over twice as many).

• Must show: A tile offered in exchange: 'one upvote and I place a tile', a pixel promised as thanks for help with something else, tiles counted as something a member can give.
• Must not show: Vote drives with no tile given (T3-051); extra accounts used to place more (T3-088); prizes for the room's helpers (T3-159).
• Decide when both: Counting alts as placing power is T3-088; offering the tiles in trade is T3-110.
• Against T3-051: Is a tile given for the vote (T3-110), or are votes gathered with nothing given (T3-051)?
• Against T3-088: Are extra accounts used to place more (T3-088), or tiles offered as payment (T3-110)?
• Against T3-159: Prizes or gifts for the room's helpers (T3-159), or a tile itself as the payment (T3-110)?
• Varies: From a joke offer for one upvote to a pixel promised as thanks for advice.
• Is not: Rewarding the room's helpers with prizes (T3-159).
• Exemplars: "1 UPVOTE AND I WILL PLACE A NEW TILE" (pgang c0002); "J'irais mettre un pixel sur r/place pour vous remercier." (france c0394)

T3-133 recovering a hacked sub

Rare tier. The moderators recover the sub after a moderator's account is hacked and used to change it.

• Must show: A moderator account compromised and used on the sub, and its repair: announcing the compromise, restoring the sub, removing what the intruder posted, explaining it to members.
• Must not show: A takeover staged as a joke (T3-023).
• Decide when both: A hack staged for April Fools is T3-023; a real compromise is T3-133.
• Against T3-023: Is the change a joke the moderators staged (T3-023), or a real compromise they repair (T3-133)?
• Against T3-093: Members playing with powers handed out for the day (T3-093), or a stolen account undone (T3-133)?
• Varies: From a one-line notice that a new moderator was hacked to removing the link the intruder posted.
• Is not: Members playing with moderator powers handed out for April Fools (T3-093).
• Exemplars: "A mods account got compromised - all is fixed now! Sorry" (PUBATTLEGROUNDS c0025, rivals c0024 c0045); "A brand new mod got hacked, it's sorted now :)" (PUBATTLEGROUNDS c0024, rivals c0025 c0045); "my account was hacked & someone decided that they wanted to have a bit of fun with the subreddit." (PUBATTLEGROUNDS c0045, rivals c0024 c0025)

T3-140 moderators disowning the canvas work

The sub's moderators say the canvas work is not the sub's: members may go on, but not in the sub's name. Floor: MMA and japan, unlike in size (MMA holds 22,396 items in the window and japan 1,332, over twice as many).

• Must show: Moderators stating that the sub as such takes no part in the canvas work: no official project, no brigading in the sub's name, members free to organise on their own.
• Must not show: Moderators gathering or removing canvas posts without saying the work is not the sub's (T3-015, T3-063); a room separating its own plan from rogue placers (T3-188).
• Decide when both: A sticky that gathers the canvas talk and disowns the work is T3-015 primary with T3-140 under rule 0.
• Against T3-188: Do the moderators say the sub has no canvas project at all (T3-140), or that placers acting against the room's own plan are not the room (T3-188)?
• Against T3-015: Is the thread only gathering canvas talk (T3-015), or do the moderators also say the work is not the sub's (T3-140)?
• Against T3-197: Do the moderators disown the work (T3-140), or does the room heed its creator (T3-197)?
• Against T3-063: Do moderators say the canvas work is not the sub's (T3-140), or remove or filter canvas posts under the sub's rules without saying so (T3-063)?
• Varies: From a moderator too tired to lead who leaves members to it to a statement that the moderators have nothing to do with any canvas activity.
• Is not: A room disowning rogue offshoots of its own work (T3-188).
• Exemplars: "we (the mods) have nothing to do with any /r/place-related activities." (japan c0091, rivals c0092); "If you guys want to organize something, go for it. I can't speak for the other mods but I'm a bit tuckered out." (MMA c0398); "don't brigade anyone on "the sub's" behalf. Have fun!" (japan c0092, rivals c0091)

T3-184 pausing the sub's usual events

The sub puts one of its recurring events on hold for the canvas and resumes it after. Floor: kanye and coldplay, unlike in size (kanye holds 4,101 items in the window and coldplay 385, over twice as many).

• Must show: A recurring event of the sub (a game among members, a contest, a daily thread) held off because of the canvas, or resumed once the canvas posts end.
• Must not show: Usual talk going on unchanged (T3-017); a change to the posting rules (T3-185).
• Decide when both: A theme that pauses an event and changes rules: the change to rules is T3-185, the paused event T3-184.
• Against T3-017: Does the usual business go on (T3-017), or is a recurring event stopped or restarted around the canvas (T3-184)?
• Against T3-185: Is a rule about what may be posted changed (T3-185), or an event of the sub paused (T3-184)?
• Varies: From holding a game round for the canvas to announcing that the regular programme is back.
• Is not: Removing canvas posts so that usual threads stay visible (T3-063).
• Exemplars: "Now that the flood of /r/place posts is over with, let's resume our regularly scheduled programming!" (coldplay c0075)

T3-185 changing the sub's posting rules

Moderators change the sub's posting rules around the canvas or April Fools, and members argue the change. Floor: Rainbow6 and warthunder, unlike in size (Rainbow6 holds 20,801 items in the window and warthunder 6,648, over twice as many).

• Must show: A change to the sub's rules or their enforcement meant to hold: allowing or banning a kind of post for a time, new flairs or filters, a rule dropped or added, members debating what the rules should be.
• Must not show: Applying the rules as they stand (T3-063); a rule change staged as a joke for the day (T3-023).
• Decide when both: Applying and changing in one theme: the larger part primary and the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-063: Is a standing rule applied (T3-063), or is a rule made, dropped or argued (T3-185)?
• Against T3-023: Is the rule change a joke for the day (T3-023), or meant to hold (T3-185)?
• Against T3-017: Are members arguing the sub's posting rules (T3-185), or talking about the sub's subject (T3-017)?
• Against T3-184: Is a rule about what may be posted changed (T3-185), or an event of the sub paused (T3-184)?
• Against T3-118: Are moderators or admins blamed for a loss (T3-118), or a change to the sub's posting rules made and argued with no loss in view (T3-185)?
• Varies: From a day's allowance for canvas posts to dropping a rule against memes for good.
• Is not: An automatic removal under an existing rule (T3-063).
• Exemplars: "Not a late April Fools': We're dropping the old Rule 2, memes are now allowed." (warthunder c0107, rivals c0121); "We've added a /r/Place link flair, please flair your posts as such if it is in regards to /r/Place at all." (Rainbow6 c0566, rivals c0567 c0568); "We're going to allow them for the next day or so. :)" (thesilphroad c0660)

G03 where the planning happens

T3-014 moving planning into a chat

The room moves its canvas planning into a chat outside the thread (a Discord most often; IRC, Skype, Telegram, Slack), setting it up, sharing invites and sending members there. Floor: bostonbruins and re_zero, unlike in size (bostonbruins holds 4,431 items in the window and re_zero 1,355, over twice as many).

• Must show: A chat set up or named for the room's canvas work; invites posted or asked for; members sent there for plans, live direction or voice.
• Must not show: Reporting in the thread what the chat decided, as the theme's own doing (T3-152); talking with other rooms in their chats or a shared one (T3-153); a new sub for the work (T3-090); arguing which chat to use (T3-109).
• Decide when both: Moving into a chat and relaying its decisions: T3-014 primary, T3-152 added when the relay has concepts of its own; meeting other rooms there adds T3-153.
• Against T3-152: Are members sent into the chat (T3-014), or told in the thread what the chat decided (T3-152)?
• Against T3-153: Is the chat the room's own planning place (T3-014), or where it meets other rooms (T3-153)?
• Against T3-090: Is the new venue a chat (T3-014) or a subreddit (T3-090)?
• Against T3-109: Is a chat simply set up and used (T3-014), or is the choice of chat argued (T3-109)?
• Against T3-015: Does the talk move out of Reddit into a chat (T3-014), or into one thread of the sub (T3-015)?
• Against T3-107: Does the planning stay in the thread (T3-107) or move into a chat (T3-014)?
• Against T3-116: Is the plan moved because rivals are reading (T3-116), or for speed and order (T3-014)?
• Varies: From one member's new server to a sub's official Discord with a channel per project; voice chat; invite links that break and are renewed.
• Is not: A room's members joining another room's chat to talk terms (T3-153).
• Exemplars: "Also, someone suggested a Discord to coordinate on so I set one up because why not." (bostonbruins c0044); "join the discord if you want to discuss where to place stuff" (re_zero c0020); "I never really made a discord before so any help modding would be appreciated." (patriots c0071)

T3-049 complaining the calls are scattered

Members complain that the room's calls and plans are scattered, duplicated or uncoordinated, and ask for one clear plan. Floor: touhou and predators, unlike in size (touhou holds 2,246 items in the window and predators 856, over twice as many).

• Must show: Complaints that the room lacks coordination: too many threads, coordinates or designs at once; no one keeping one plan up to date; members unsure where the work is.
• Must not show: Gathering the talk into one thread (T3-015) or onto one template (T3-091) as an act; doubting the room can manage the work at all (T3-136).
• Decide when both: A complaint answered in the same theme by a megathread or a template: the act (T3-015, T3-091) is primary when it has more concepts, T3-049 otherwise.
• Against T3-015: Is the scattering complained of with no gathering act (T3-049), or is the talk gathered into one thread (T3-015)?
• Against T3-091: Are many plans complained of (T3-049), or is one template set for all (T3-091)?
• Against T3-136: Is the room said to be uncoordinated (T3-049), or too weak or too few (T3-136)?
• Against T3-188: Is the plan itself scattered (T3-049), or are placers acting against a plan set apart from the room (T3-188)?
• Against T3-125: Is the lack of a plan complained of (T3-049), or stated as the room's way (T3-125)?
• Varies: From a request for one post that states the goal to a member admitting there is zero coordination; during the work and after it.
• Is not: A member saying the room has too few hands for its design (T3-136).
• Exemplars: "can we get a clear post on what the goal is? Going through this thread I'm seeing a whole bunch of different coordinates" (predators c0027); "we have pretty good consensus on discord but the posts on the sub are all over the place because there is no single one that is kept up to date" (touhou c0024); "there is zero coordination at this stage." (russia c0051)

T3-090 opening a canvas sub

Members open a separate subreddit for the room's canvas work, or ask for one, and send canvas talk there. Floor: europe and sweden, unlike in size (europe holds 29,726 items in the window and sweden 8,092, over twice as many).

• Must show: A new subreddit made for the canvas work (a place sub for the room or nation), asked for, or used: canvas posts redirected to it, members told to go there.
• Must not show: One thread inside the sub (T3-015); a chat (T3-014); a hub sub for many kindred rooms (T3-013); what the canvas sub becomes after the canvas (T3-111).
• Decide when both: A sub made for the canvas that later takes a lasting purpose: making it is T3-090, its future T3-111.
• Against T3-015: Is the canvas talk sent to a new sub (T3-090), or to one thread in the old one (T3-015)?
• Against T3-014: Is the new venue a subreddit (T3-090) or a chat (T3-014)?
• Against T3-013: Is the new sub for this room's work (T3-090), or a hub for many kindred rooms (T3-013)?
• Against T3-111: Is the sub being opened or used for the canvas (T3-090), or given a purpose after it (T3-111)?
• Against T3-197: Is a canvas sub opened for order (T3-090), or to keep the work out of the creator's way (T3-197)?
• Varies: From a request for a separate sub or filter to moderators sending every canvas post to a national place sub.
• Is not: A sub that gathers many kindred rooms for a joint mark (T3-013).
• Exemplars: "I've made the subreddit r/nzplace to talk about place-related stuff." (newzealand c0369, rivals c0346); "We refer everything related to r/place toithe dedicated subreddit: /r/SwedenOnPlace/." (sweden c0604); "Please use /r/europeplace for further /r/Place posts" (europe c0648, rivals c0750)

T3-107 keeping planning in the thread

Members keep the canvas planning in the Reddit thread instead of a chat. Floor: samuraijack and cloud9, unlike in size (samuraijack holds 5,172 items in the window and cloud9 232, over twice as many).

• Must show: A choice or agreement to coordinate in the thread rather than in a chat, or a chat tried and failed so that the thread carried the work.
• Must not show: Moving into a chat (T3-014); arguing which chat to use (T3-109).
• Decide when both: A theme that tries a chat and returns to the thread: T3-107 when the return carries the work, T3-014 when the chat does.
• Against T3-014: Does the planning stay in the thread (T3-107) or move into a chat (T3-014)?
• Against T3-109: Is the thread chosen over any chat (T3-107), or one chat argued against another (T3-109)?
• Varies: From a small room agreeing to stay in touch through the thread to a member recalling that a chat never coordinated anything.
• Is not: Gathering canvas talk into a megathread (T3-015).
• Exemplars: "Alright, let's just stay in touch through this thread then." (samuraijack c0284, rivals c0282); "Our community isn't the largest, so as far as i know, we done things through here" (samuraijack c0282, rivals c0284); "I tried getting the sneaky discord to do it but we could never coordinate." (cloud9 c0063)

T3-109 arguing which chat to use

Members argue over which chat to organise in, or whether to use one at all: Discord, IRC, Slack, an official or an unofficial server. Floor: theblackvoid and wales, unlike in size (theblackvoid holds 9,430 items in the window and wales 530, over twice as many).

• Must show: A dispute or choice among chats: Discord against IRC or Slack, the official server against a new one, whether a chat suits the room at all.
• Must not show: Simply moving into a chat (T3-014); disputing whether the chat may decide for the room (T3-114).
• Decide when both: When the question is which venue, T3-109; when it is whether the venue's decisions bind the room, T3-114.
• Against T3-014: Is a chat set up and used (T3-014), or is the choice of chat argued (T3-109)?
• Against T3-114: Is the argument about which chat (T3-109), or about the chat's right to decide (T3-114)?
• Against T3-107: Is one chat weighed against another (T3-109), or the thread kept over any chat (T3-107)?
• Varies: From an argument over proprietary software to a choice between two servers; a Void member rejecting any chat for an uncoordinated Void.
• Is not: Members disputing that a Discord may decide for the room (T3-114).
• Exemplars: "Why discord? and not a sane thing like IRC?" (archlinux c0141, rivals c0145 c0149); "Go ahead and use this one for now :) will set up an official one for /r/Wales as a whole tomorrow if I get a chance" (wales c0051); "having a discord goes against my thoughts on what The Void should be" (theblackvoid c1879)

T3-114 disputing the chat's authority

Members dispute whether the chat may decide for the room: who speaks there, who is left out, whether its plans bind the thread. Floor: furry and wales, unlike in size (furry holds 3,156 items in the window and wales 530, over twice as many).

• Must show: Contest over the chat's standing: a Discord said to have no right to decide; the work said to belong on Reddit; members outside the chat said to be left out; the chat's decisions defended as binding; a chat seized or closed.
• Must not show: Choosing which chat to use (T3-109); relaying the chat's decisions with no dispute (T3-152); disputing who may speak for a room toward other rooms (T3-126).
• Decide when both: A dispute over who speaks for the room to outsiders is T3-126; over whether the room's own chat governs the room, T3-114.
• Against T3-152: Are the chat's decisions only reported (T3-152), or contested or defended as binding (T3-114)?
• Against T3-109: Is the question which chat (T3-109), or whether the chat may decide (T3-114)?
• Against T3-126: Is the dispute about who speaks for the room to other rooms (T3-126), or about the chat's power inside the room (T3-114)?
• Varies: From a member asking why the Discord is an authority to outsiders seizing the room's server.
• Is not: Members telling outsiders that no one can speak for the placers (T3-126).
• Exemplars: "and why are they an authority?" (furry c0310); "Discord hat nichts zu entscheiden" (placeDE c0035, rivals c0363); "dies ist eine reddit aktion und sollte auf reddit bleiben." (germany c0101)

T3-116 hiding the plan from rivals

Members hide the room's plan from rivals who read the thread: private messages, their own language, codes. Floor: lakers and russia, unlike in size (lakers holds 3,479 items in the window and russia 1,401, over twice as many).

• Must show: A plan kept from rivals who read the thread: moved to private messages or a closed chat because of infiltrators; written in the room's own language or in a code.
• Must not show: Moving to a chat for speed or order with no rival in view (T3-014); spying in a rival's chat (T3-132); recruiting quietly so attackers do not notice (T3-144).
• Decide when both: A move into a chat made because rivals read the thread is T3-116; the same move for speed is T3-014.
• Against T3-014: Is the plan moved because rivals are reading (T3-116), or for speed and order (T3-014)?
• Against T3-132: Are rivals kept out of one's own plan (T3-116), or is the rival's plan read from inside (T3-132)?
• Against T3-144: Is the plan hidden from readers (T3-116), or the recruiting kept quiet so attackers do not come (T3-144)?
• Against T3-083: Is language used to keep rivals out (T3-116), or a gap bridged to deal with another room (T3-083)?
• Varies: From asking members to write only in Hindi to letter-and-number codes in Russian; a plan passed by private message because rival fans got in.
• Is not: Recruiting quietly to avoid attackers (T3-144).
• Exemplars: "Alright. Pm this to others, don't post it in the thread because the celtics fans are infiltrating" (lakers c0131, rivals c0130); "Bakchodon, belgium ke log hamare thread padh rahe hai or hamari strategy ko samajh rahe hai." (bakchodi c0121, rivals c0230 c0118); "как вы думаете, лучше нам говорит по русский чтобы нас голланцы не понимали?" (russia c0031, rivals c0033 c0032)

T3-132 spying in a rival's chat

Members watch a rival room's chat from inside, or an outsider watches theirs, and report what they see. Floor: babymetal and shitredditsays, unlike in size (babymetal holds 5,231 items in the window and shitredditsays 1,337, over twice as many).

• Must show: Someone inside another room's chat or thread as a watcher: joining a rival's Discord to learn its plans, reporting what is said there, an outsider announcing that they are watching.
• Must not show: Meeting other rooms in chat to talk terms (T3-153); hiding one's own plan (T3-116).
• Decide when both: A visit that is both open talks and watching: T3-153 when terms are talked, T3-132 when the report is what was overheard.
• Against T3-153: Is the visit open, to talk with the other room (T3-153), or hidden, to watch it (T3-132)?
• Against T3-116: Is the rival's plan read from inside (T3-132), or one's own plan kept from rivals (T3-116)?
• Against T3-087: Is an attack traced from the pixels and what others said (T3-087), or learned from inside the rival's chat (T3-132)?
• Against T3-176: Is the rival watched from inside (T3-132), or harmed from inside by a script (T3-176)?
• Varies: From one member undercover in the Void's Discord warning of an invasion to a member laughing at rivals panicking in their chat.
• Is not: A diplomat serving in the open across many servers (T3-194).
• Exemplars: "i am spying on their discord channel" (babymetal c0090); "I AM UNDERCOVER IN THE VOID DISCORD. THEY MAY INVADE CUBERS SOON. WATCH OUT" (cubers c0242); "Watched them freak out in their discord and laughed." (shitredditsays c0046)

T3-152 announcing what the chat decided

Members bring the chat's decisions back to the thread: the plan agreed, a change authorised, where to place next. Floor: radiohead and SwissNeutralityZone, unlike in size (radiohead holds 7,280 items in the window and SwissNeutralityZone 537, over twice as many).

• Must show: A report in the thread of what the chat decided or is doing: 'agreed on Discord', 'the Discord is working on it', the chat's next target, a change explained as approved there.
• Must not show: Moving into the chat (T3-014); disputing whether the chat may decide (T3-114); a decision put to the thread by vote (T3-066).
• Decide when both: The move into the chat is T3-014, the relay of its decisions T3-152; when both have concepts of their own, the larger is primary.
• Against T3-014: Are members sent into the chat (T3-014), or told in the thread what it decided (T3-152)?
• Against T3-114: Is the chat's decision reported (T3-152), or its right to decide contested (T3-114)?
• Against T3-066: Is a decision put to the room by vote or poll (T3-066), or a chat's decision reported (T3-152)?
• Varies: From one line saying a change was agreed on Discord to running relays of the chat's orders during an attack.
• Is not: A moderator putting a choice to a vote in the thread (T3-066).
• Exemplars: "Changing text for readability purpose as was agreed on discord" (radiohead c0175, rivals c0158 c0189); "the discord is working on this right now, the eyes are a legit change" (madokamagica c0030); "After some discussion on Discord, we figured out that the best thing to do right now, was to keep cleaning the flag, but move it at the same time one pixel up" (SwissNeutralityZone c0050)

T3-153 meeting other rooms in chat

Members meet other rooms in chats (their own, the other's or a shared council) to talk terms, borders or joint work. Floor: stardustcrusaders and epublica, unlike in size (stardustcrusaders holds 4,002 items in the window and epublica 149, over twice as many).

• Must show: Contact with another room through a chat: inviting its members to the room's Discord to talk, visiting theirs, joining a shared server or council, passing a template or a request there.
• Must not show: The room's own planning chat with no other room in it (T3-014); watching a rival's chat in secret (T3-132); the deal itself, when that is the doing (G14, G15).
• Decide when both: Meeting in chat and the deal made there: the deal's kind (T3-010, T3-150, T3-151) is primary, and T3-153 is added when the meeting in chat has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-014: Is another room in the chat (T3-153), or only the room's own members (T3-014)?
• Against T3-132: Is the visit open, to talk (T3-153), or hidden, to watch (T3-132)?
• Against T3-194: Is a member acting for the room toward another room as its envoy (T3-194), or are members meeting in a chat (T3-153)?
• Against T3-010: Is the theme the place of the talks (T3-153), or the border or space agreed (T3-010)?
• Varies: From an invite to talk borders in the Green Lattice Discord to diplomats on a world council server.
• Is not: A member spying in a rival's Discord (T3-132).
• Exemplars: "Just spoke to the Swiss on their discord and they strongly recommended getting permission/help from /r/ainbowroad" (stardustcrusaders c0204, rivals c0044); "We could come to some sort of agreement though. Come talk in the Green Lattice discord." (redhotchilipeppers c0057); "join us spacex people to discuss the border on spacex" (epublica c0056)

G04 calling people in to place

T3-002 calling members in to place

Members call the room's own members to come and place for its work: to start, build, finish or hold a picture, calls to placers who are not yet a group included. Floor: thebluecorner and dallasstars, unlike in size (thebluecorner holds 5,939 items in the window and dallasstars 790, over twice as many).

• Must show: Calls to the room's members, or to placers not yet gathered into a group, to come and place: 'come help', 'we need more people', 'everyone join', rallies to build, finish or repair a work, posts asking who is in.
• Must not show: Calls aimed at other subs (T3-062) or at another canvas room as a room (T3-084); welcoming canvas visitors into the sub (T3-044). The national flag as the room's mark carries T3-065; writing the sub's name carries T3-169.
• Decide when both: A call made mostly of coordinates or a template is T3-070, with T3-002 added when the call has concepts of its own; a call to defend a work under attack is T3-005 when the defence leads. When a theme holds two or more of these acts (an idea of what to make offered to the room, T3-033; hands called to place, T3-002; the work placed and its progress reported, T3-038), count the concepts of each: the act with the most concepts of its own is primary, and another is added under rule 0 only with concepts of its own. The opening post does not lead because it comes first. On a tie, T3-038 when the work was placed; else T3-002 when the mark was already chosen, T3-033 when it was not.
• Against T3-062: Are the room's own members called (T3-002), or the members of other subs (T3-062)?
• Against T3-005: Is the call to build or finish (T3-002), or to defend against an attack under way (T3-005)?
• Against T3-033: Count the concepts of each: is the larger share an idea of what to make offered to the room (T3-033), or hands called to a mark already chosen (T3-002)? The opening post does not lead because it comes first.
• Against T3-070: Is the call itself the doing (T3-002), or the coordinates and templates that tell placers what to place (T3-070)?
• Against T3-104: Are people asked to place (T3-002), or those already placing cheered on (T3-104)?
• Against T3-169: Is the work the sub's name written on the canvas (T3-169), whatever the call or report about it, or any other picture called for (T3-002)?
• Against T3-016: Is the event explained (T3-016), or are members called to come and place (T3-002)?
• Against T3-038: Count the concepts of each: is the larger share the work placed and its progress reported (T3-038), or hands called for it (T3-002)? An opening call does not lead because it comes first.
• Against T3-051: Are members asked to vote a post up (T3-051), or to come and place (T3-002)?
• Against T3-065: Is the work a flag of the land the room is named for or speaks for, a flag built in r/guatemala being Guatemala's unless its concepts name another (T3-065), or any other picture (T3-002)?
• Against T3-167: Is a time set for placing together (T3-167), or hands called with no time (T3-002)?
• Against T3-044: Are the room's own members called to come and place (T3-002), or outsiders brought to the sub by its mark and welcomed (T3-044)?
• Against T3-084: Are the room's own members called to place (T3-002), or another canvas room asked, as a group, for help (T3-084)?
• Against T3-144: Are hands called for in the open (T3-002), or recruited only inside friendly communities so the work draws no attackers (T3-144)?
• Varies: From one 'come help me out' that draws no reply to repeated rallies through a long build; calls to start, to finish, to repair; calls to placers repeating a pattern before any group exists.
• Is not: Calls to build the room's national flag (T3-065).
• Exemplars: "Here's what I have so far: http://i.imgur.com/z5Q6TwA.png Come help me out!" (dallasstars c0075); "wtf, we're outnumbered! we need more people!" (thebluecorner c0256); "Get everyone you can" (korea c0067)

T3-044 recruiting canvas visitors

The room's mark on the canvas brings outsiders to the sub; members welcome them, advertise the sub on the canvas for it, or count the newcomers. Floor: parahumans and livecounting, unlike in size (parahumans holds 1,829 items in the window and livecounting 192, over twice as many).

• Must show: Newcomers led to the sub by its canvas mark: visitors saying they came from r/place, members welcoming them, the sub's name placed so that viewers find it, subscriber growth counted.
• Must not show: The room's own members finding its mark already placed (T3-082); former fans returning (T3-196); calling members to place (T3-002).
• Decide when both: Whose eyes find the mark: outsiders led to the sub go to T3-044; the room's own members finding work they did not know of go to T3-082.
• Against T3-082: Are outsiders led to the sub by the mark (T3-044), or members finding their own room's mark already placed (T3-082)?
• Against T3-196: Is the newcomer new to the community (T3-044), or a former fan coming back (T3-196)?
• Against T3-169: Is the sub's name written to sign the work (T3-169), or to bring visitors in (T3-044)?
• Against T3-002: Are the room's own members called to come and place (T3-002), or outsiders brought to the sub by its mark and welcomed (T3-044)?
• Against T3-127: Is the notice of the creators sought (T3-127), or are canvas visitors led into the sub (T3-044)?
• Against T3-129: Is the mark meant to bring visitors to the sub (T3-044), or to make others notice a demand (T3-129)?
• Against T3-189: Are the newcomers the mark draws welcomed (T3-044), or feared (T3-189)?
• Varies: From a visitor saying the sign brought them in to members tracking subscriber stats day by day; welcomes in the room's own idiom.
• Is not: A member of the room discovering that the room's mark is already on the canvas (T3-082).
• Exemplars: "Hello, I just came from r/place. I don't think I'd ever come here if it wasn't for that sign" (parahumans c0041); "welcome to all visitors from /r/place!" (livecounting c0043, rivals c0004); "I'm happy that this sub decided to take part in /r/place. As a result I (and seemingly others) have found this great community" (npr c0035)

T3-062 recruiting kindred subs to help

Members take the room's call into other subs, mostly kindred ones (sister, regional, related fandoms), to bring more hands to the room's work. Floor: theblackvoid and epublica, unlike in size (theblackvoid holds 9,430 items in the window and epublica 149, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's call for hands carried into other subs or communities, or proposed: 'ask r/X for help', threads opened in other subs, recruiting from related communities.
• Must not show: Calls to the room's own members (T3-002); one canvas room asking another, as a group, to help or make room (T3-084); a hub sub gathering kindred rooms (T3-013).
• Decide when both: A request to an organised canvas group, room to room, is T3-084; a call for hands posted to a community, T3-062.
• Against T3-002: Are the room's own members called (T3-002), or other subs' members (T3-062)?
• Against T3-084: Is another sub's membership asked for hands (T3-062), or another canvas group asked, as a group, to help with this room's work (T3-084)?
• Against T3-013: Is help sought for this room's work (T3-062), or are kindred rooms gathered into one hub (T3-013)?
• Against T3-011: Is help asked for (T3-062), or sent to another room's work (T3-011)?
• Against T3-064: Does the message to another sub carry the room's joke (T3-064), or ask that sub for help on the canvas (T3-062)?
• Against T3-128: Are hands sought for the room's work (T3-062), or for a streamer's attack (T3-128)?
• Against T3-137: Are other subs' members recruited to the room (T3-062), or does the room's member join another's build (T3-137)?
• Against T3-144: Is the call kept inside friendly communities for safety (T3-144), or carried to other subs to bring hands (T3-062)?
• Against T3-051: Are upvotes asked so a post climbs (T3-051), or the room's call for hands carried into other subs (T3-062)?
• Varies: From a suggestion to ask a neighbouring sports sub to threads posted across many subs by a dying faction.
• Is not: Sending the room's members to help another room's work (T3-011).
• Exemplars: "The void is dying, we have to recruit from other subreddits." (theblackvoid c0184); "Maybe get some help from r/clevelandcavs" (osu c0053); "He abierto un hilo en Plaza Podemos para pedir más ayuda" (epublica c0017)

T3-104 cheering the builders on

Members and passers-by cheer those placing: praise, encouragement and good wishes while the work goes on. Floor: monalisaclan and vermont, unlike in size (monalisaclan holds 1,148 items in the window and vermont 263, over twice as many).

• Must show: Encouragement aimed at builders during the work: 'keep going', 'nice work team', 'good luck', praise from members or from outsiders who may not place themselves.
• Must not show: Calls for more hands (T3-002); celebrating the finished work (T3-009); thanking or crediting helpers afterwards (T3-072, T3-043).
• Decide when both: Praise while the work goes on is T3-104; once the work is called finished, T3-009.
• Against T3-002: Are people asked to come and place (T3-002), or those placing encouraged (T3-104)?
• Against T3-009: Is the work going on (T3-104), or done and celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-043: Are builders encouraged (T3-104), or the makers credited (T3-043)?
• Against T3-072: Are those placing cheered on while the work goes on (T3-104), or other rooms thanked for their help (T3-072)?
• Varies: From a passer-by's 'good job to everyone chipping in' to members keeping each other company through a night's building.
• Is not: Celebrating the finished mark (T3-009).
• Exemplars: "Keep going you glorious people and make this canvas a more civilised one!" (monalisaclan c0127); "Just thought I'd say that the carrots are inspiring and to keep it up!" (farmcarrots c0056); "Nice work team" (vermont c0028)

T3-129 making passers-by notice a demand

Members use the canvas to put a demand before passers-by: a wanted comeback, a new season, a sauce. Floor: rickandmorty and fxKorea, unlike in size (rickandmorty holds 34,483 items in the window and fxKorea 69, over twice as many).

• Must show: A mark planned or placed so that people viewing the canvas see a demand or announcement the room wants noticed by others (a company, a creator, Redditors at large).
• Must not show: The sub's name placed to bring visitors to the sub (T3-044); the room's emblem proposed as its mark (T3-033).
• Decide when both: A demand written over another room's art is T3-068 for the converting, with T3-129 added for the demand when it has a concept of its own.
• Against T3-044: Is the mark meant to bring visitors to the sub (T3-044), or to make others notice a demand (T3-129)?
• Against T3-033: Is a mark proposed as the room's emblem (T3-033), or as a message carrying a demand (T3-129)?
• Varies: From a wish that random Redditors notice a band's wanted comeback to a giant request for a fast-food sauce.
• Is not: A sub writing its own name for canvas visitors (T3-044).
• Exemplars: "If SM won't notice we want a comeback, maybe atleast some random Redditors will?" (fxKorea c0002); "We should go to /r/place and make a giant McDonald's Szechuan sauce request" (rickandmorty c0360, rivals c0431); "Everyone! Let's let our friends at /r/place who haven't heard that Season 3 is out!" (rickandmorty c0242, rivals c0360)

T3-144 recruiting quietly to avoid attackers

Rare tier. Members recruit only inside friendly communities and keep the work small, so that it draws no attackers.

• Must show: Recruiting held back or kept inside friendly communities because publicity might bring attackers; a small presence chosen for safety.
• Must not show: Hiding the plan's words from rival readers (T3-116); calling for hands in the open (T3-002, T3-062).
• Decide when both: Keeping the call quiet is T3-144; keeping the plan's text from readers is T3-116.
• Against T3-116: Is the recruiting kept quiet so attackers do not come (T3-144), or the plan hidden from rivals who read it (T3-116)?
• Against T3-062: Is the call kept inside friendly communities for safety (T3-144), or carried to other subs to bring hands (T3-062)?
• Against T3-002: Are hands called for in the open (T3-002), or recruited only inside friendly communities so the work draws no attackers (T3-144)?
• Against T3-191: Is the recruiting kept quiet (T3-144), or the name kept off the work (T3-191)?
• Varies: From weighing whether publicity would do more damage to recruiting through a few friendly chats.
• Is not: Writing the plan in a code so that rivals cannot read it (T3-116).
• Exemplars: "maintain our tiny presence and recruit mostly from within lolicon communities" (loliconsunite c0058, rivals c0057 c0088); "Would the publicity result in more damage?" (loliconsunite c0057, rivals c0058 c0088); "Nothing has been done through Discord except me bringing up our existence to a couple loli groups I'm in." (loliconsunite c0088, rivals c0057 c0058)

T3-159 rewarding helpers with prizes

Members reward those who helped the work with prizes: gold, medals, game codes, giveaways. Floor: kerbalspaceprogram and HomestarRunner, unlike in size (kerbalspaceprogram holds 2,930 items in the window and HomestarRunner 177, over twice as many).

• Must show: A prize offered or given for work on the canvas or for the room's effort: Reddit gold, mock medals, game codes, giveaways.
• Must not show: Thanks or credit with no prize (T3-072, T3-043); a tile offered as payment (T3-110).
• Decide when both: Thanks and a prize in one theme: T3-159 when the prize has a concept of its own, beside the thanking kind.
• Against T3-043: Is credit given in words (T3-043), or a prize given (T3-159)?
• Against T3-110: Is a prize given to helpers (T3-159), or a tile itself offered as payment (T3-110)?
• Against T3-131: Is a sale of the work argued over (T3-131), or helpers rewarded with prizes (T3-159)?
• Against T3-072: Are helpers given a prize (T3-159), or other rooms thanked with no prize (T3-072)?
• Varies: From gold offered before a feat to mock medals and a giveaway after.
• Is not: A pixel promised as thanks for help with something else (T3-110).
• Exemplars: "I offer a month of reddit gold to anyone who achieves the ramp thing." (kerbalspaceprogram c0073); "I hereby award gold medals to" (HomestarRunner c0143); "I sent you a Sydney code, great organization!" (paydaytheheist c0011)

T3-189 fearing newcomers the mark draws

Members fear what the canvas mark will bring into the sub: an influx of newcomers who do not read the rules or swamp the community. Floor: scp and parahumans, unlike in form (scp is a sub whose members write the fiction together, parahumans the fan sub of one author's web serial).

• Must show: Worry about the newcomers the mark draws: an influx that will swamp the sub or its site, newcomers who ignore the rules, the sub said to have gone downhill since.
• Must not show: Welcoming newcomers (T3-044); objecting that canvas posts flood the sub (T3-075).
• Decide when both: A theme that welcomes and fears the influx: the side with more concepts is primary, the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-044: Are the newcomers the mark draws welcomed (T3-044), or feared (T3-189)?
• Against T3-075: Is the complaint about canvas posts crowding the sub (T3-075), or about the people the mark brings in (T3-189)?
• Varies: From jokes that the Foundation cannot risk discovery to complaints that the influx ruined the sub.
• Is not: Members welcoming visitors who came from r/place (T3-044).
• Exemplars: "consider what happened to r/NoSleep. Too many people trying to submit without bothering" (scp c0106, rivals c0108); "yeah It would likely force them to halt all new articles entirely." (scp c0108, rivals c0106); "sure hope you at least made a buck off this influx because the subreddit has entirely gone to shit" (parahumans c0179)

T3-196 drawing lapsed fans back

The room's mark on the canvas brings former fans back to the community; members welcome them or hope it will. Floor: neopets and mindcrack, unlike in size (neopets holds 3,490 items in the window and mindcrack 1,133, over twice as many).

• Must show: Former members or fans returning because they saw the room's mark; members hoping the canvas will revive the sub.
• Must not show: Newcomers led to the sub by the mark (T3-044).
• Decide when both: A theme welcoming both: the larger group of concepts decides; the other is added under rule 0 when it has three or more concepts.
• Against T3-044: Is the person new to the community (T3-044), or a former fan coming back (T3-196)?
• Varies: From one returning fan's fond memories to a sub hoping the canvas wakes it up.
• Is not: A visitor who never knew the community (T3-044).
• Exemplars: "I forgot about neopets until I saw y'all's jub jub on r/place." (neopets c0101); "I forgot about this community until I saw this. Brought back memories :)" (mindcrack c0050, rivals c0044 c0042); "I dropped it a while back, and seeing it on /r/place reminded me of it." (parahumans c0113, rivals c0139)

G05 telling placers what to place

T3-034 asking for coordinates and instructions

Members ask where and how to place: coordinates, instructions, what to do with their pixel. Floor: fullcommunism and chess, unlike in size (fullcommunism holds 3,915 items in the window and chess 1,414, over twice as many).

• Must show: Requests for directions: where the work is, which coordinates, what to do, whether one is placing correctly; a pixel offered with a request to be told where to put it.
• Must not show: Coordinates, templates or how-to given (T3-070); asking what r/place is (T3-016).
• Decide when both: Questions and answers in one theme: the side with more concepts is primary, the other added under rule 0 when it has three or more.
• Against T3-070: Are directions asked for (T3-034) or given (T3-070)?
• Against T3-016: Is the question how and where to place for the room (T3-034), or what r/place is (T3-016)?
• Varies: From a newcomer asking how to join to a member demanding specific instructions before the room will act.
• Is not: Explaining what r/place is to members who have not seen it (T3-016).
• Exemplars: "Where? So the rest of us can help" (chess c0048, rivals c0062 c0042); "bir pikselim var milletime armağan olsun, söyleyin nereye koyayım?" (turkey c0082); "How does one join the whole placing tiles?" (fullcommunism c0146)

T3-066 putting decisions to a vote

A choice about the work is put to the room: a vote, a strawpoll, a call to decide together. Floor: argentina and farmcarrots, unlike in size (argentina holds 10,453 items in the window and farmcarrots 682, over twice as many).

• Must show: Members asked to decide together: votes, strawpolls and polls in the thread, 'we need to decide as a group', a leader letting the room choose; members casting votes.
• Must not show: The design settled by argument with no vote (T3-004); a chat's decision reported (T3-152); office-holders elected (T3-173).
• Decide when both: A design argument that ends in a vote: T3-004 primary when the arguing leads, T3-066 added when the vote has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-004: Is the design argued out (T3-004), or put to a vote or poll (T3-066)?
• Against T3-152: Is the decision taken by the room in the thread (T3-066), or reported from a chat (T3-152)?
• Against T3-173: Is a choice about the work voted (T3-066), or a person elected to an office (T3-173)?
• Against T3-101: Does the room decide (T3-066), or is one member put in charge (T3-101)?
• Varies: From a strawpoll between two backgrounds to an extended vote on what to paint next; leaders deferring to polls.
• Is not: A faction holding elections for its offices (T3-173).
• Exemplars: "We need to agree on one of these guys Created a strawpoll" (fireemblem c0308); "Ok guys we need to decide as a group whether or not we fix this" (farmcarrots c0137); "VOTEN YA! VOTACIÓN EXTENDIDA HASTA LAS 17:30. LO QUE GANE SERA PINTADO AL SUR DE URUGUAY!" (argentina c0391)

T3-070 sharing coordinates, templates and how-to

Members circulate what placers need to reproduce the work: coordinates, templates, grids, guides, colour, border and timing plans, and how-to. Floor: rickandmorty and startrek, unlike in size (rickandmorty holds 34,483 items in the window and startrek 3,498, over twice as many).

• Must show: Coordinates, templates, grid images, overlays, guides, colour plans, border plans, timings or how-to posted or updated for placers to follow by hand.
• Must not show: Insisting that the room use one template against rival versions (T3-091); scripts that place automatically (T3-028); asking for coordinates (T3-034).
• Decide when both: A call to place that carries coordinates: T3-070 when the directions lead, T3-002 when the call does; both with concepts of their own, rule 0.
• Against T3-091: Are directions shared for anyone to use (T3-070), or the room held to one official plan against others (T3-091)?
• Against T3-002: Is the doing the directions (T3-070), or the call for hands (T3-002)?
• Against T3-028: Is a picture or coordinates given for people to place by hand (T3-070), or a script that places (T3-028)?
• Against T3-004: Is the design still argued (T3-004), or its directions handed out (T3-070)?
• Against T3-016: Is the event explained for anyone (T3-016), or a guide, template or coordinates for the room's work posted to follow (T3-070)?
• Against T3-034: Are directions asked for (T3-034) or given (T3-070)?
• Against T3-103: Are directions given to all (T3-070), or parts handed to particular members (T3-103)?
• Against T3-038: Is the mark being placed and its progress reported, coordinates given as where the work in progress stands (T3-038), or are directions posted for placers to follow, coordinates, templates, guides or colour plans (T3-070)? A link that only shows where the finished work is points to it (T3-026), not a direction.
• Varies: From one pair of coordinates to step-by-step guides and colour-coordination threads; plans of colours, borders and timings are included.
• Is not: Arguing over which design to build (T3-004).
• Exemplars: "Update: Here is the guide: http://i.imgur.com/kAzcjIv.jpg" (startrek c0089); "The grid layout of our flag!" (canada c0228, rivals c0064); "Coords are (159,721) if anyone needs them" (rickandmorty c0353)

T3-091 keeping everyone on one template

Members hold the room to one official design or plan, against versions and placers that stray. Floor: cirkeltrek and msu, unlike in size (cirkeltrek holds 1,511 items in the window and msu 501, over twice as many).

• Must show: One plan declared official or current and members told to follow it: 'stick to the original', 'too many people do not follow the plan', an official design thread.
• Must not show: Coordinates or templates shared with no insistence on one (T3-070); choosing which design (T3-004).
• Decide when both: Choosing the design is T3-004; once it is chosen, keeping placers to it is T3-091.
• Against T3-070: Are directions shared for use (T3-070), or one plan imposed against others (T3-091)?
• Against T3-004: Is the design being chosen (T3-004), or the chosen design enforced (T3-091)?
• Against T3-049: Is the scattering complained of (T3-049), or one plan imposed as its remedy (T3-091)?
• Against T3-069: Are the room's pieces narrowed to fewer (T3-069), or placers held to one design of one piece (T3-091)?
• Against T3-089: Are hand placers held to the current plan (T3-091), or scripts brought into line with it (T3-089)?
• Against T3-103: Is everyone held to one plan (T3-091), or the plan cut into assigned parts (T3-103)?
• Varies: From one plea to keep the lettering to official coordination threads with updated plans.
• Is not: A member posting the latest template with no word on following it (T3-070).
• Exemplars: "For the love of god stick to the original lettering on the "Go Green"." (msu c0029); "Inderdaad, er zijn te veel mensen die het plan niet volgen." (cirkeltrek c0302); "Official Design thread" (monalisaclan c0016)

T3-101 putting one member in charge

The room puts one member, or a few, in charge of the work, or members ask for someone in charge. Floor: mls and TheGreatGreenBox, unlike in size (mls holds 12,324 items in the window and TheGreatGreenBox 178, over twice as many).

• Must show: A leader named, claimed, appointed or asked for: someone in charge of the work, project leads through whom decisions go, overseers or ministers appointed, a temporary leader.
• Must not show: Votes on the work (T3-066); a faction's elections for its offices (T3-173); disputes over who speaks for the room to others (T3-126).
• Decide when both: A leader appointed and then elected in form: T3-173 when the election is the doing, T3-101 when the leading is.
• Against T3-066: Does the room decide by vote (T3-066), or does one member lead (T3-101)?
• Against T3-173: Is a leader for the work named (T3-101), or are a faction's offices filled by election (T3-173)?
• Against T3-126: Is someone put in charge inside the room (T3-101), or is it disputed who speaks for the room to others (T3-126)?
• Against T3-172: Is a leader named for the work (T3-101), or the order's standing rules set (T3-172)?
• Against T3-187: Is one member put in charge (T3-101), or does the leader hand the work to all (T3-187)?
• Varies: From a demand for somebody clearly in charge to a faction appointing ministers and overseers.
• Is not: A faction's ritual elections (T3-173).
• Exemplars: "WE NEED A NEW THREAD WITH SOMEBODY CLEARLY IN CHARGE." (mls c0307); "I guess you can call me the leader of the pack as i organised us and did all the diplomacy and coordination." (starcraft c0139, rivals c0114); "I am the new temp leader in the discord chat please don't give up we will not lose our corner" (TheGreatGreenBox c0051)

T3-103 dividing the picture among teams

The work is divided: teams, colours, rows or areas of the picture assigned to members. Floor: dota2 and crusaderkings, unlike in size (dota2 holds 42,568 items in the window and crusaderkings 3,660, over twice as many).

• Must show: Parts of the work assigned: teams for areas, colours or rows; 'one team fixes, another expands'; members asking to be given a job.
• Must not show: One template for all with no division (T3-091); shifts by hour of the day (T3-141).
• Decide when both: Teams by part and shifts by hour in one theme: the larger part primary, the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-141: Is the work divided by part of the picture (T3-103), or by hours of the day (T3-141)?
• Against T3-070: Are directions given to all (T3-070), or parts handed to particular members (T3-103)?
• Against T3-091: Is everyone held to one plan (T3-091), or the plan cut into assigned parts (T3-103)?
• Varies: From a member asking to be assigned a job to colour armies and an icon split into 5x5 areas.
• Is not: Handing the defence to another time zone overnight (T3-141).
• Exemplars: "We need to make teams. One will fix trolling pixels. Another team to work on accuracy" (dota2 c0109); "Team Field - We will take care of the blue field." (AmericanFlaginPlace c0041); "We'll need 4 armies: 1 grey, 2 red, and one white." (crusaderkings c0006, rivals c0030)

T3-125 saying the room wings it

Members say the room has no plan or group: it goes with the flow, individuals placing on their own. Floor: australia and bisexual, unlike in size (australia holds 10,830 items in the window and bisexual 1,191, over twice as many).

• Must show: Statements that the room has no plan, organiser or group: 'we just wing it', 'go with the flow', 'no common group, all individuals'.
• Must not show: Complaints that the calls are scattered (T3-049); separating the room's plan from placers it does not control (T3-188).
• Decide when both: A room saying it has no plan and complaining of it: T3-125 when the lack is accepted, T3-049 when it is complained of.
• Against T3-049: Is the lack of a plan complained of (T3-049), or stated as the room's way (T3-125)?
• Against T3-188: Do members say they have no plan (T3-125), or set their plan apart from placers they do not control (T3-188)?
• Varies: From a cheerful 'we don't do organize' to a member who cannot find where any coordination happens.
• Is not: A room drawing the line between its coordinated members and placers it does not control (T3-188).
• Exemplars: "Yeah definitely we don't do organize, just go with the flow." (southafrica c0057); "not so far, just winging it." (australia c0278, rivals c0277); "Unfortunately, there's no like common group doing this; it's all individuals of the bi community" (bisexual c0063)

T3-141 covering the night shift

Members keep the work through the night and across time zones: night watches, the work handed to another continent while they sleep. Floor: dota2 and texas, unlike in size (dota2 holds 42,568 items in the window and texas 2,000, over twice as many).

• Must show: Watch kept over the hours when most members sleep: night watches, members volunteering to stay up, the work handed to members in other time zones, scripts left running overnight for the purpose.
• Must not show: Defence or repair with no word on hours or sleep (T3-005, T3-021); the picture divided into parts (T3-103).
• Decide when both: Keeping watch and repairing: T3-021 primary, T3-141 added when the hours and shifts have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-021: Is the work watched and repaired (T3-021), or watched through the hours others sleep (T3-141)?
• Against T3-103: Is the work divided by hour (T3-141), or by part of the picture (T3-103)?
• Against T3-005: Is an attack fought off (T3-005), or the night covered (T3-141)?
• Against T3-167: Do members place together at one time (T3-167), or take turns across the hours (T3-141)?
• Varies: From one member going to bed and hoping others hold to a German night shift over American pixels.
• Is not: A member repairing the work during the day (T3-021).
• Exemplars: "Europe, America's going to sleep. Hold the position!" (dota2 c0728); "Texan living abroad. Defending it will you sleep." (texas c0063); "Wenn wir schlafen gehen und die Amis wach sind kann vieles passieren. Ich sollte Nachtwache schieben." (placeDE c0101)

T3-167 timing a mass placement together

Members set a time to place together so that many pixels land at once. Floor: penguins and guatemala, unlike in size (penguins holds 2,046 items in the window and guatemala 46, over twice as many).

• Must show: A time fixed or proposed for members to place together: a start time so that a few are not overrun, a scheduled push, a jointly timed ending.
• Must not show: Calls to place with no time set (T3-002); watches across the night (T3-141).
• Decide when both: A call with a time: T3-167 when the time is the point, T3-002 otherwise.
• Against T3-002: Is a time set for placing together (T3-167), or hands called with no time (T3-002)?
• Against T3-141: Do members place together at one time (T3-167), or take turns across the hours (T3-141)?
• Varies: From a proposed start time for two placers to a faction's jointly timed white ending.
• Is not: Handing the watch to another time zone (T3-141).
• Exemplars: "We should also try to schedule a time that most users are free and online to work together to take over space." (penguins c0089); "We should create a time to start so it isn't just us two (also so we don't get overrun)" (guatemala c0003); "we will all paint this canvas white, together." (purplecorner c0057)

G06 strain, doubt and giving up

T3-036 judging the canvas too full

Members judge that the canvas is too full, or too far gone, for the room to join. Floor: schoolidolfestival and bigbang, unlike in size (schoolidolfestival holds 3,661 items in the window and bigbang 3, over twice as many).

• Must show: Statements that there is no space left, or that it is too late, to put the room's work on the canvas: 'no space for us now', 'the chart is too full', the canvas closed before the room began.
• Must not show: Searching for a spot (T3-020); doubting the room's strength (T3-136); asking a host room for space (T3-035).
• Decide when both: Searching for a spot while judging there is none: T3-020 when the search leads, T3-036 when the judgement does.
• Against T3-020: Is a spot looked for (T3-020), or is the canvas judged to have none (T3-036)?
• Against T3-136: Is the canvas too full (T3-036), or the room too weak (T3-136)?
• Against T3-035: Is space asked of a host room (T3-035), or is the canvas judged full (T3-036)?
• Varies: From a sad 'no space for us now' to a proposal to try a second canvas instead.
• Is not: A room giving up a spot it held under attack (T3-059, T3-181).
• Exemplars: "Would have been a good idea had we done that from the beginning but the chart is simply too full of pictures" (schoolidolfestival c0076, rivals c0083 c0077); "I'm trying as well. I don't think there's any space for us now... :(" (bigbang c0002); "The event is over unfortunately, r/place has closed." (chess c0078)

T3-059 urging others to give up

Members tell the room, or its defenders, to give the work up: it is lost, over, not worth the fight. Floor: apocalypserising and gameattack, unlike in size (apocalypserising holds 702 items in the window and gameattack 105, over twice as many).

• Must show: Calls on others in the room to stop, let the work go or accept the loss: 'it's over, just give up', 'let it go', 'burn it', 'a lost cause'.
• Must not show: A member quitting the effort themselves (T3-181); mourning the loss (T3-029); weighing whether to fight or move (T3-124).
• Decide when both: Urging and refusing in one theme: the side with more concepts is primary; refusing to yield the space to a neighbour is T3-123.
• Against T3-181: Are others told to give up (T3-059), or does the speaker quit (T3-181)?
• Against T3-123: Is giving up urged (T3-059), or refused (T3-123)?
• Against T3-029: Is the loss mourned (T3-029), or is giving up urged (T3-059)?
• Against T3-124: Is the room's next step weighed (T3-124), or giving up urged (T3-059)?
• Against T3-136: Is the room's strength doubted (T3-136), or giving up urged (T3-059)?
• Varies: From a gentle 'we made a good effort, let's have a beer' to scorn for a flag's last defenders.
• Is not: Members mourning a lost work after it is gone (T3-029).
• Exemplars: "Its over guys just give up." (apocalypserising c0035); "Guys, I think we made a good effort, but I think we need to just sit back and have a couple beers." (gameattack c0017); "Place is dead, let it go." (bardmains c0083)

T3-074 working around the timer

Members work around the one-pixel cooldown, too few hands and placing troubles while they build. Floor: vegan and bannedfromanime_irl, unlike in size (vegan holds 7,616 items in the window and bannedfromanime_irl 15, over twice as many).

• Must show: The pixel limit, the cooldown, too few placers or placing troubles worked around while building: what the limit lets the room do, designs scaled to the hands at hand, broken timers, mobile trouble, glitches that stop or delay placing.
• Must not show: Doubting that the room can manage a work at all (T3-136); placing beyond the limit by extra accounts or any other means (T3-088); explaining what r/place is (T3-016).
• Decide when both: Doubting whether the room can manage a work at all, even during the work, goes to T3-136; working around the timer and too few hands while building goes to T3-074. Glitches: explaining how the canvas or a glitch works is T3-016; using a glitch to place beyond the limit is T3-088; coping with a glitch that stops or delays placing is T3-074.
• Against T3-136: Is the room's capacity for the work doubted (T3-136), or are the timer and few hands worked around while building (T3-074)?
• Against T3-088: Is the limit worked within (T3-074), or broken by extra accounts or a glitch to place more (T3-088)?
• Against T3-016: Is the cooldown explained as how r/place works (T3-016), or worked around for the room's build (T3-074)?
• Varies: From one member's broken timer to a room scaling its panda to the few who place; finals, sleep and phones fitted around the five minutes.
• Is not: A member saying the room has too few people to make the logo at all (T3-136).
• Exemplars: "right now the sidebar says 330 r/yugioh subscribers are online but we probably have less than 10 people working" (yugioh c0108, rivals c0118); "if the timer doesn't show up it does't save unfortunately" (calgaryflames c0024); "The timer was removed which made it easier, but now it's up again. I'll check back in an hour." (vegan c0212)

T3-098 questioning the room's canvas presence

Members ask whether and how the room shows on the canvas: why it is absent, whether a work counts as the room's, how it compares with other rooms. Floor: overwatch and minecraft, unlike in size (overwatch holds 45,381 items in the window and minecraft 6,314, over twice as many).

• Must show: Questions about the room's presence: why the room has no work on the canvas, whether a picture counts as the room's, comparisons with other subs' marks, whether a duplicate or a small mark represents the room well.
• Must not show: A mark proposed (T3-033); the canvas judged worthless (T3-037); the room's strength doubted (T3-136).
• Decide when both: A question that ends in a proposal: T3-033 when the proposal leads, T3-098 added when the questioning has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-033: Is a mark proposed (T3-033), or the room's presence or absence questioned (T3-098)?
• Against T3-037: Is the canvas itself judged (T3-037), or the room's showing on it (T3-098)?
• Against T3-085: Is the room's presence questioned (T3-098), or the room weighed against the nations on the canvas (T3-085)?
• Against T3-136: Is it asked whether and how the room shows on the canvas (T3-098), or doubted that the room has the people or strength for a work (T3-136)?
• Varies: From 'why don't we have a quaggan?' to arguing whether a game's pictures count as the sub's participation.
• Is not: A member saying r/place is a waste of time (T3-037).
• Exemplars: "/r/TF2 has their logo on /r/place.. Why can't /r/overwatch organize and get a logo going there??" (overwatch c0507, rivals c0209 c0511); "People are recreating /r/place in Minecraft... why is nobody putting minecraft on /r/place?" (minecraft c0198, rivals c0172); "Why don't we have a quaggan in Place?" (GuildWars2 c0166)

T3-124 weighing fighting against moving

Members weigh, after a loss or under pressure, whether to fight for the spot, rebuild it there, or move elsewhere. Floor: battlecats and OrderOfTheKoi, unlike in size (battlecats holds 3,436 items in the window and OrderOfTheKoi 16, over twice as many).

• Must show: A choice put between fighting and moving, or between rebuilding in place and relocating: 'restore it where it was or move?', 'not this time, we fight back', a move proposed against holding on.
• Must not show: Moving after an attack as a thing done (T3-022); refusing a neighbour's request to yield (T3-123); urging the room to give up (T3-059).
• Decide when both: The weighing is T3-124 and the move made after it T3-022; when both have concepts of their own, rule 0.
• Against T3-022: Is the move weighed (T3-124), or made (T3-022)?
• Against T3-123: Is moving one option weighed (T3-124), or refused outright to a neighbour (T3-123)?
• Against T3-059: Is the room's next step weighed (T3-124), or giving up urged (T3-059)?
• Against T3-005: Is the attack fought off (T3-005), or is fighting one option weighed against another (T3-124)?
• Varies: From a quick 'move or restore?' to long arguments over raiding a neighbour or holding ground.
• Is not: Relocating the work once it has been decided (T3-022).
• Exemplars: "Guide is eaten, do we want to try to restore it where it was or move to a new location?" (terraria c0123); "While negotiating with different groups, I've made concessions on our side. Not this time. We fight back." (texas c0122); "think the void killed it, sorry about the effort it took, maybe put it in the taskbar?" (battlecats c0191)

T3-136 doubting the room's strength

Members doubt that the room has the people or strength for a work: too few, too small, outnumbered, the work impossible. Floor: paladins and dragonquest, unlike in size (paladins holds 5,823 items in the window and dragonquest 359, over twice as many).

• Must show: Doubt that the room can make or hold a work at all: too few people, a small sub against a large one, estimates of the hands a work needs, a design judged impossible; doubt during the work counts.
• Must not show: Working around the timer and few hands while building (T3-074); urging the room to give up (T3-059).
• Decide when both: Doubting whether the room can manage a work at all, even mid-work, goes to T3-136; working around the timer and too few hands while building goes to T3-074.
• Against T3-074: Is the room's capacity for the work doubted (T3-136), or are the timer and few hands worked around (T3-074)?
• Against T3-059: Is the room's strength doubted (T3-136), or giving up urged (T3-059)?
• Against T3-036: Is the room too weak (T3-136), or the canvas too full (T3-036)?
• Against T3-049: Is the room too few or too weak (T3-136), or too scattered (T3-049)?
• Against T3-069: Does the room put its pixels on fewer pieces (T3-069), or doubt it can manage any (T3-136)?
• Against T3-098: Is it asked whether and how the room shows on the canvas (T3-098), or doubted that the room has the people or strength for a work (T3-136)?
• Varies: From a hopeful 'now all we need is enough people' to a small sub conceding it cannot fight a larger one.
• Is not: A member explaining how few pixels the timer allows while the room builds (T3-074).
• Exemplars: "there is nothing our small ass subreddit can do to combat anything the Pats subreddit decides to do" (falcons c0110); "it needs at least 100 people working on it to make." (paladins c0150); "Trying to make a dragonlord but it seems impossible." (dragonquest c0024)

T3-181 quitting the effort under strain

Members quit the canvas work themselves: tired, stressed, beaten by scripts or rivals, or at odds with the room. Floor: fivenightsatfreddys and ockytop, unlike in size (fivenightsatfreddys holds 9,633 items in the window and ockytop 978, over twice as many).

• Must show: A member or members stopping their own part in the work: 'I give up', 'I'm done', 'they got tired of it', leaving over scripts or over a split in the room.
• Must not show: Telling others to give up (T3-059); mourning the lost work (T3-029); a faction splitting over doctrine (T3-190).
• Decide when both: Quitting and mourning in one theme: the larger part primary, the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-059: Does the speaker quit (T3-181), or tell others to give up (T3-059)?
• Against T3-029: Is the loss mourned (T3-029), or the effort abandoned (T3-181)?
• Against T3-190: Does a faction split over doctrine (T3-190), or does a member leave the effort (T3-181)?
• Against T3-187: Does a member quit under strain (T3-181), or pass the work on (T3-187)?
• Varies: From an embarrassed admission of giving up hours ago to workers quitting because it was too stressful; leaving because scripts took the fun out.
• Is not: A defender telling others that the work is a lost cause (T3-059).
• Exemplars: "I give up. We started strong. But just like tennessee tradition we are in the wrong place. I'm done." (ockytop c0045); "Everyone who were working on it got tired of it as it was too stressful." (fivenightsatfreddys c0480); "I'm ashamed to admit I gave up hours ago, great fucking job so far though" (denverbroncos c0090)

G07 choosing what to make and where

T3-004 settling the mark's design

Members work out what the mark should look like (picture, colours, size, lettering, details) and correct it against the plan. Floor: tagpro and pitt, unlike in size (tagpro holds 1,937 items in the window and pitt 315, over twice as many).

• Must show: Argument or work on the mark's look: which picture or version, colours, letters, fonts, size, outlines, details; corrections to make the placed work match the design.
• Must not show: Proposing that the room make a mark at all (T3-033); choosing where it goes (T3-020); holding everyone to a chosen template (T3-091); reshaping the mark against tampering (T3-055); a bigger or second piece (T3-041).
• Decide when both: Design argued and spot chosen in one theme: the larger part primary and the other under rule 0. A design argument settled by a vote adds T3-066 when the vote has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-033: Is a mark proposed to the room (T3-033), or is its look worked out (T3-004)?
• Against T3-020: Is the question what it looks like (T3-004), or where it goes (T3-020)?
• Against T3-091: Is the design being settled (T3-004), or the settled design enforced against strays (T3-091)?
• Against T3-055: Is the look changed for its own sake (T3-004), or to make the mark harder to tamper with (T3-055)?
• Against T3-041: Is the mark's own design settled (T3-004), or a bigger or second piece added (T3-041)?
• Against T3-066: Is the design argued out (T3-004), or put to a vote or poll (T3-066)?
• Against T3-070: Is the design still argued (T3-004), or its directions handed out (T3-070)?
• Against T3-077: Is a still design settled (T3-004), or a change over time planned (T3-077)?
• Against T3-169: Is the mark's design settled (T3-004), or its signature added (T3-169)?
• Against T3-038: Is the mark being placed and its progress reported (T3-038), or its look argued and corrected against the plan (T3-004)?
• Varies: From a one-pixel correction to long arguments over which picture represents the room; letters, fonts, colours and outlines.
• Is not: Holding placers to the agreed design against those who stray (T3-091).
• Exemplars: "I think the design should be changed. Nobody knows what the pups are." (tagpro c0152); "Making them 4 tiles wide like we were doing before looks a bit tacky" (pitt c0095); "I'm gonna give it an outline of white where there is non-rainbow to give it some definition!" (anaheimducks c0039)

T3-020 choosing a canvas spot

Members look for and choose where on the canvas the mark goes: open space, a corner, beside kindred marks, a new location. Floor: h3h3productions and mizzou, unlike in size (h3h3productions holds 16,925 items in the window and mizzou 72, over twice as many).

• Must show: Where the mark should go: free space found, corners and neighbours weighed, a location announced or changed before or while building.
• Must not show: Moving the work after an attack (T3-022); asking a host room for space (T3-035); judging there is no space left (T3-036).
• Decide when both: A new spot chosen after an attack is T3-022; a spot chosen in the first place, or for a further piece, is T3-020.
• Against T3-022: Is a spot chosen in the first place (T3-020), or a new one found after an attack (T3-022)?
• Against T3-035: Is space found on the open canvas (T3-020), or asked of a room that holds it (T3-035)?
• Against T3-036: Is a spot found (T3-020), or the canvas judged to have none (T3-036)?
• Against T3-004: Is the question where it goes (T3-020), or what it looks like (T3-004)?
• Varies: From a quick 'top right corner!' to long searches across a full canvas; spots beside kindred works; striking where the defence is weak.
• Is not: Relocating the work once attackers have taken its spot (T3-022).
• Exemplars: "We could get a tiny MU next to KSU with all the colleges but it will be a tight fit." (mizzou c0007); "there's still a pretty good amount of areas without anything significant in them." (h3h3productions c0054); "Locatie noua. Sus si putin stanga" (romania c0032)

T3-033 proposing the room's mark

A member offers the room an idea of what to make on the canvas, and calls the room to make it. Floor: leagueoflegends and stardewvalley, unlike in size (leagueoflegends holds 75,751 items in the window and stardewvalley 1,541, over twice as many).

• Must show: An idea of what the room should put on the canvas, offered to the room: 'we should put X on r/place', 'let's make a ...', a proposal with or without a picture; slogans and symbols proposed as the room's mark included.
• Must not show: Calls for hands to a mark already chosen (T3-002); the design of a chosen mark worked out (T3-004).
• Decide when both: When a theme holds two or more of these acts (an idea of what to make offered to the room, T3-033; hands called to place, T3-002; the work placed and its progress reported, T3-038), count the concepts of each: the act with the most concepts of its own is primary, and another is added under rule 0 only with concepts of its own. The opening post does not lead because it comes first. On a tie, T3-038 when the work was placed; else T3-002 when the mark was already chosen, T3-033 when it was not.
• Against T3-002: Count the concepts of each: is the larger share an idea of what to make offered to the room (T3-033), or hands called to a mark already chosen (T3-002)? The opening post does not lead because it comes first.
• Against T3-004: Is a mark proposed (T3-033), or a chosen mark's look worked out (T3-004)?
• Against T3-098: Is a mark proposed (T3-033), or the room's absence from the canvas questioned (T3-098)?
• Against T3-041: Is the room's first mark proposed (T3-033), or a second piece beside an existing one (T3-041)?
• Against T3-092: Is a mark proposed for the room to make (T3-033), or made alone and reported (T3-092)?
• Against T3-129: Is a mark proposed as the room's emblem (T3-033), or as a message carrying a demand (T3-129)?
• Against T3-038: Count the concepts of each: is the larger share an idea of what to make offered to the room (T3-033), or the mark placed and its progress reported (T3-038)? A proposal does not lead because it comes first.
• Varies: From one member's wish to put a symbol on the canvas to a series of picture proposals; political slogans proposed as such sit here.
• Is not: A call for help on a picture already started (T3-002).
• Exemplars: "we should put a plansewalker symbol on r/place" (magictcg c0138); "We need to rep Stardew Valley on https://www.reddit.com/r/place/ !!! Let's make a jumino or something!" (stardewvalley c0001); "We should make a pixel art for our lord and saviour on /r/place" (leagueoflegends c0383)

T3-055 reshaping the mark against tampering

Members change the mark's shape to make it harder to tamper with: borders, boxes, outlines, enlarging or compacting it, dropping parts easily griefed. Floor: vinesauce and armok, unlike in size (vinesauce holds 366 items in the window and armok 74, over twice as many).

• Must show: A design change made for protection: a border or box around the mark, an outline, the mark enlarged or compacted, a vulnerable part (a name, letters) dropped or replaced.
• Must not show: Repairing the mark as it was (T3-021); design changes for their own sake (T3-004); fighting off attackers (T3-005).
• Decide when both: Repair and protective reshaping in one theme: T3-021 primary when the repair leads, T3-055 added when the reshaping has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-021: Is the mark restored as it was (T3-021), or changed in shape so it resists tampering (T3-055)?
• Against T3-004: Is the change made for the look (T3-004), or for protection (T3-055)?
• Against T3-005: Are attackers fought off (T3-005), or the mark's shape changed against them (T3-055)?
• Against T3-042: Is the mark reshaped to resist tampering (T3-055), or expansion dropped for upkeep (T3-042)?
• Varies: From a green box around a mushroom to a name dropped as too easily griefed and a lattice built around the figure instead.
• Is not: Re-placing the pixels attackers changed (T3-021).
• Exemplars: "We should build a green box around the Vineshroom to protect it from vandalism" (vinesauce c0082); "The name was too easily griefed. Building Green Lattice around HULK now." (TheHulk c0020); "Before expanding more, I propose we try to squish the dwarves in as closely as possible for easier defense" (armok c0046)

T3-077 animating the mark in timelapse

Rare tier. Members plan a mark that moves or flashes when the canvas is watched as a timelapse.

• Must show: A plan to change the mark over time so that it animates in the timelapse: flashing colours, a walking figure, a scripted animation.
• Must not show: Saving the work in screenshots and timelapses (T3-105).
• Decide when both: A plan that animates the mark and saves the timelapse: T3-077 for the plan, T3-105 for the saving.
• Against T3-105: Is the timelapse used to keep the work (T3-105), or the work designed to move in it (T3-077)?
• Against T3-004: Is a still design settled (T3-004), or a change over time planned (T3-077)?
• Varies: From a toadstool flashing red and green to a scripted animation.
• Is not: Sharing a timelapse of the finished work (T3-105).
• Exemplars: "no one has tried to make a flashing or moving image when the whole thing is viewed in a timelapse." (Mario c0010, rivals c0011); "making the toadstool near the top on the very left flash from completely red to completely green would be a good start" (Mario c0011, rivals c0010); "met wat handig gescript animatie toe te passen" (PlaceNL c0087)

T3-092 making a tribute alone

One member makes a small mark for the room, or for someone they admire, on their own and reports it, often asking others to keep it. Floor: bangtan and SydneyFC, unlike in size (bangtan holds 1,691 items in the window and SydneyFC 34, over twice as many).

• Must show: A single member making a small piece alone and saying so: 'I wrote a small X, protect it', 'I added a little something for my bias', 'I decided to make a tribute'.
• Must not show: Members reporting their share of the room's work (T3-003); proposing a mark to the room (T3-033).
• Decide when both: A lone piece that the room then takes up: T3-092 for the lone making, T3-038 for the room's build. A piece begun alone and then offered to the room for others to join: T3-033 when the offer leads, T3-092 when the lone making is reported with no call.
• Against T3-003: Is the work one member's own small piece (T3-092), or a share in the room's work (T3-003)?
• Against T3-033: Is a mark proposed for the room to make (T3-033), or made alone and reported (T3-092)?
• Against T3-060: Is the piece added to a shared mark (T3-060), or made alone apart from one (T3-092)?
• Against T3-160: Is the tribute to someone who died (T3-160), or a lone member's tribute to anyone (T3-092)?
• Varies: From a tiny tribute made before a long drive to a small logo one member keeps alive.
• Is not: A member reporting how many pixels they placed on the room's flag (T3-003).
• Exemplars: "I've got a 12 hour drive ahead of me, so I decided to make a tribute to Datlof on r/place." (yogscast c0043); "I wrote a small "SYD FC" on r/place. Protect it" (SydneyFC c0019, rivals c0012); "I added a little something for my bias" (bangtan c0055)

T3-160 building memorials to the dead

Members make or protect memorials on the canvas to people who died: musicians, drivers, relatives, the victims of a disaster. Floor: ireland and davidbowie, unlike in size (ireland holds 12,112 items in the window and davidbowie 246, over twice as many).

• Must show: A work made, proposed or defended as a memorial to the dead, or an existing work recast as one.
• Must not show: Mourning the lost canvas work (T3-029); tributes to the living (T3-092).
• Decide when both: A memorial defended against neighbours: T3-160 primary when the memorial is the work's point, T3-005 added for the defence.
• Against T3-029: Is a dead person honoured by the work (T3-160), or the lost work mourned (T3-029)?
• Against T3-092: Is the tribute to someone who died (T3-160), or a lone member's tribute to anyone (T3-092)?
• Varies: From a road renamed for a flag designer who had died to drivers' and musicians' memorials defended against neighbours.
• Is not: Members mourning their own erased work (T3-029).
• Exemplars: "Our mission has become this much more important. The 'Gilbert Baker' Memorial Rainbow Road." (ainbowroad c0197); "Join the cause. RIP Fr. Derek Cassidy, and my Granda and Granny." (ireland c0158); "Our DB Memorial is now engraved into the history of Reddit" (davidbowie c0034)

T3-169 signing the sub's name

Members put the sub's name on or beside the work: r/name, a sign, a label. Floor: ss13 and drawhelix, unlike in size (ss13 holds 1,478 items in the window and drawhelix 99, over twice as many).

• Must show: The sub's name, or a short form of it, written on the canvas; the choice whether to write it; keeping it there.
• Must not show: Advertising the sub to bring visitors in, when that is the stated point (T3-044); leaving the name off on purpose (T3-191).
• Decide when both: Writing the sub's name is T3-169's doing; a call to write it is its form, and one concept carries one placement.
• Against T3-044: Is the name written to sign the work (T3-169), or to bring visitors to the sub (T3-044)?
• Against T3-191: Is the name put on (T3-169), or left off on purpose (T3-191)?
• Against T3-004: Is the mark's design settled (T3-004), or its signature added (T3-169)?
• Against T3-002: Is the work the sub's name written on the canvas (T3-169), whatever the call or report about it, or any other picture called for (T3-002)?
• Varies: From a short tag under a logo to arguments over which short name fits the space.
• Is not: Dropping the sub's name so that the work is no target (T3-191).
• Exemplars: "We should display our subreddit name" (PurplePixels c0074); "Just added in R/SS13, just need the Greytide worldwide bit." (ss13 c0009); "we could use /r/DRHE. It could probably fit right under Lord without taking up too much space from the rainbow." (drawhelix c0038)

T3-191 leaving the work unsigned

Rare tier. Members leave the sub's name off the work, so that it draws no attackers or because the builders are not the sub's.

• Must show: A decision to drop or omit the sub's name or label from the work, with its reason.
• Must not show: Writing the name on (T3-169).
• Decide when both: A theme that argues both: the side that prevails in the concepts decides.
• Against T3-169: Is the name put on (T3-169), or left off (T3-191)?
• Against T3-144: Is the recruiting kept quiet (T3-144), or the name kept off the work (T3-191)?
• Varies: From dropping a label that makes the room a target to saying the builders are not the sub's.
• Is not: Writing the sub's name beside the work (T3-169).
• Exemplars: "having "furry" right there in text makes us a prime target" (furry c0147, rivals c0131); "The people working on it aren't from r/furry. we can drop the r/furry from it." (furry c0131, rivals c0147)

T3-197 heeding the creator's wishes

Rare tier. The room shapes its canvas work around what the creator of its subject wants: the creator's name kept off, canvas talk moved out of the creator's way.

• Must show: The wishes of the person the sub is about (an author, an artist) passed on and followed in the canvas work: not using their name, keeping canvas talk out of their sub, not pinging them.
• Must not show: Moderators' rules for canvas posts with no creator's wish behind them (T3-063, T3-015).
• Decide when both: Canvas talk moved to a new sub for the creator's sake: T3-090 for the move, T3-197 for the reason when it has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-063: Are canvas posts handled under the sub's rules (T3-063), or shaped by the creator's wish (T3-197)?
• Against T3-090: Is a canvas sub opened for order (T3-090), or to keep the work out of the creator's way (T3-197)?
• Against T3-140: Do the moderators disown the work (T3-140), or does the room heed its creator (T3-197)?
• Against T3-127: Is the creator's notice sought (T3-127), or the creator's wishes followed (T3-197)?
• Against T3-015: Is the canvas talk moved or shaped because the creator of the room's subject asked (T3-197), or gathered into one thread with no creator's wish behind it (T3-015)?
• Varies: From passing on that the author wants his name kept out to asking members not to ping him.
• Is not: Moderators gathering canvas talk into a megathread for order (T3-015).
• Exemplars: "Am hearing S4hbbQtdz/cRgjTfqcESz5Bj8VM= would prefer if we kept his name out of it, so focus on the top part and protecting the bug." (parahumans c0033, rivals c0063); "the moderator of this sub and author of its subject matter has asked to keep all the /r/place stuff to the pinned" (parahumans c0079, rivals c0063); "Please don't ping S4hbbQtdz/cRgjTfqcESz5Bj8VM=. He gets enough spam as it is, and just distracts him from important stuff." (parahumans c0053, rivals c0063)

G08 building and growing the mark

T3-003 reporting one's own placing labour

Members report their own part in the placing: what they placed, fixed or defended, and when. Floor: overwatch and kingdomhearts, unlike in size (overwatch holds 45,381 items in the window and kingdomhearts 5,319, over twice as many).

• Must show: A member telling of their own placing: 'I helped', 'I put in my part', 'I placed my first pixel', what they fixed or defended, the hours they spent.
• Must not show: The progress of the room's work as a whole (T3-038); one member's lone tribute (T3-092); others credited (T3-043).
• Decide when both: A member's own share told inside a celebration: T3-009 primary when the celebrating leads, T3-003 when the member's share is the point.
• Against T3-038: Is the room's work reported (T3-038), or one member's share in it (T3-003)?
• Against T3-092: Is the share part of the room's work (T3-003), or a small piece the member made alone (T3-092)?
• Against T3-043: Does the member tell their own part (T3-003), or credit others (T3-043)?
• Against T3-009: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or one's own part in it told (T3-003)?
• Varies: From 'I helped! Yay me!' to accounts of hours of repair; told during the work and after the close.
• Is not: A member making a small tribute alone (T3-092).
• Exemplars: "I helped with building the large one and defended both." (kingdomhearts c0199); "i put in my part." (overwatch c0086); "I placed my first pixel almost exactly 5 minutes before it closed." (liverpoolfc c0190, rivals c0189)

T3-026 announcing the mark is up

Members announce that the room's mark is on the canvas: 'we got on r/place', with a picture or its place. Floor: linux and genderfluid, unlike in size (linux holds 4,888 items in the window and genderfluid 30, over twice as many).

• Must show: Announcements that the room is on the canvas: 'we made it onto r/place', a screenshot or link showing the room's mark, others pointed to where it is.
• Must not show: Members discovering a mark of the room that they did not know of (T3-082); celebrating the finished work at or after the close (T3-009); reports of progress (T3-038).
• Decide when both: An announcement that is also a celebration: T3-026 while the work stands during placement, T3-009 when the finished work is celebrated.
• Against T3-082: Is the room's own work announced (T3-026), or a mark found that the room did not know of (T3-082)?
• Against T3-009: Is the mark announced as being up (T3-026), or the finished work celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-038: Is the mark's progress reported (T3-038), or its presence announced (T3-026)?
• Against T3-065: Is the room's mark announced as up (T3-026), or is the work a flag of the land the room is named for or speaks for, announced, called for or built (T3-065)? A flag built in a room named for a land is that land's flag unless its concepts name another.
• Varies: From a one-line post to a weekly roundup that names the mark.
• Is not: A member finding that someone made the sub's logo without the room (T3-082).
• Exemplars: "We got on /r/place!" (genderfluid c0007); "We made it onto r/place" (calgaryflames c0110); "GNU/Linux on /r/place" (linux c0031)

T3-038 building and reporting the mark

Members build the mark and report its progress: started, half done, almost there, the next part. Floor: greenlattice and hyperlightdrifter, unlike in size (greenlattice holds 5,244 items in the window and hyperlightdrifter 170, over twice as many).

• Must show: Placing the mark and reports of its state: started, coordinates of the work in progress, half done, almost finished, the parts done and left.
• Must not show: Calls for hands (T3-002); the design argued (T3-004); the finished work celebrated (T3-009); repair after an attack (T3-021).
• Decide when both: Building with repairs: the larger part primary and the other under rule 0. When a theme holds two or more of these acts (an idea of what to make offered to the room, T3-033; hands called to place, T3-002; the work placed and its progress reported, T3-038), count the concepts of each: the act with the most concepts of its own is primary, and another is added under rule 0 only with concepts of its own. The opening post does not lead because it comes first. On a tie, T3-038 when the work was placed; else T3-002 when the mark was already chosen, T3-033 when it was not.
• Against T3-002: Count the concepts of each: is the larger share the work placed and its progress reported (T3-038), or hands called for it (T3-002)? An opening call does not lead because it comes first.
• Against T3-021: Is the mark built for the first time (T3-038), or restored after damage (T3-021)?
• Against T3-009: Is the work under way (T3-038), or finished and celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-003: Is the room's mark reported (T3-038), or one member's own share (T3-003)?
• Against T3-073: Is the first build's progress reported (T3-038), or what happened to the work once it stood (T3-073)?
• Against T3-026: Is the mark's progress reported (T3-038), or its presence announced (T3-026)?
• Against T3-004: Is the mark being placed and its progress reported (T3-038), or its look argued and corrected against the plan (T3-004)?
• Against T3-033: Count the concepts of each: is the larger share an idea of what to make offered to the room (T3-033), or the mark placed and its progress reported (T3-038)? A proposal does not lead because it comes first.
• Against T3-070: Is the mark being placed and its progress reported, coordinates given as where the work in progress stands (T3-038), or are directions posted for placers to follow, coordinates, templates, guides or colour plans (T3-070)? A link that only shows where the finished work is points to it (T3-026), not a direction.
• Varies: From a start at given coordinates to running reports until the close.
• Is not: Restoring the mark after an attack (T3-021).
• Exemplars: "Making really good progress now. We are about half way done." (necrodancer c0014); "I've started to make one. Finished with the face and eyes in the vicinity of (886,563)" (hyperlightdrifter c0008); "WE ARE ALMOST THERE FELLOW GREENS!!!" (greenlattice c0109)

T3-041 extending the room's work

The room adds pieces to its work or enlarges it: a second picture, another album, a bigger logo, details around the first. Floor: masseffect and muse, unlike in size (masseffect holds 37,082 items in the window and muse 442, over twice as many).

• Must show: Proposals or work to add to the room's existing mark or to make another: a next piece, a bigger version, additions around the first.
• Must not show: The room's first mark proposed (T3-033); a member adding a personal piece to a shared mark (T3-060); spreading a faction's colour over others' work (T3-171).
• Decide when both: Additions argued as design: T3-004 when the existing mark's look is settled, T3-041 when a new piece or an enlargement is added.
• Against T3-033: Is the room's first mark proposed (T3-033), or more added beside or around it (T3-041)?
• Against T3-060: Does the room extend its own work (T3-041), or does a member add a personal piece to a shared mark (T3-060)?
• Against T3-042: Is growth pursued (T3-041), or set aside for upkeep (T3-042)?
• Against T3-004: Is the existing mark's look settled (T3-004), or a new piece or enlargement added (T3-041)?
• Against T3-061: Does the room grow into empty space or onto its own work (T3-041), or into a neighbour's space (T3-061)?
• Against T3-113: Is a further piece added to any work (T3-041), or a national emblem to the flag (T3-113)?
• Against T3-171: Is the room's work extended (T3-041), or a colour spread for its own sake (T3-171)?
• Varies: From a cake beside a logo to a run of album covers; enlarged letters; details added around a figure.
• Is not: The room's first proposal of a mark (T3-033).
• Exemplars: "Let's do College Dropout next on /r/place" (kanye c0147); "An idea to add the AI logo above the N7 logo" (masseffect c0182); "Just an update. The origin cover is next to it now :)" (muse c0078)

T3-042 choosing upkeep over expansion

The room puts keeping what it holds before growing: maintain, clean, defend first, no new fronts. Floor: greenlattice and armok, unlike in size (greenlattice holds 5,244 items in the window and armok 74, over twice as many).

• Must show: Upkeep chosen over growth: calls to maintain, clean or defend before expanding; refusals of new projects or attacks because the room cannot hold more; designs scaled to what can be defended.
• Must not show: Concentrating effort on fewer of the room's pieces (T3-069); repairs as such (T3-021); reining in the room's own attacks (T3-076).
• Decide when both: Choosing among the room's own pieces is T3-069; choosing holding over growing is T3-042.
• Against T3-069: Is one of the room's pieces dropped for another (T3-069), or growth set aside to keep what it holds (T3-042)?
• Against T3-041: Is growth pursued (T3-041), or set aside (T3-042)?
• Against T3-021: Is the work repaired (T3-021), or upkeep argued as the room's priority over growth (T3-042)?
• Against T3-076: Is the room's own attack on others stopped (T3-076), or upkeep put before expansion (T3-042)?
• Against T3-055: Is the mark reshaped to resist tampering (T3-055), or expansion dropped for upkeep (T3-042)?
• Varies: From a refusal to anger another sub to a faction's 'clean first' against its expansionists.
• Is not: Dropping one of the room's pieces to save pixels for another (T3-069).
• Exemplars: "To all you expansionists: CLEAN FIRST!" (greenlattice c0257, rivals c0530); "I'm focused on maintaining the current pattern for now" (armok c0035); "focus on keeping our small loli sign together before we decide to make any big plans." (loliconsunite c0051)

T3-060 adding a personal piece

Members add their own piece to a mark many share: a word, a heart, a drug's name, a character. Floor: drugs and TransFlagPlace, unlike in size (drugs holds 14,139 items in the window and TransFlagPlace 1,922, over twice as many).

• Must show: A member or a small group adding their own part to a shared mark: their word, symbol or character placed into a common work.
• Must not show: The room extending its own work (T3-041); a lone tribute apart from any shared mark (T3-092); converting a neighbour's art (T3-068).
• Decide when both: A personal addition the room then adopts: T3-060 for the adding, T3-041 when the room takes it up as its own extension.
• Against T3-041: Does the room extend its work (T3-041), or does a member add a personal piece to a shared mark (T3-060)?
• Against T3-092: Is the piece added to a shared mark (T3-060), or made alone apart from one (T3-092)?
• Against T3-056: Is a joint mark of kindred rooms made (T3-056), or a personal piece added inside it (T3-060)?
• Against T3-068: Does a member add their own piece to a mark many share (T3-060), or turn another room's art into the room's sign (T3-068)?
• Varies: From one drug's name in a molecule area to words and hearts added to a shared flag.
• Is not: A member making a tribute alone, away from any shared mark (T3-092).
• Exemplars: "I got the THC under DMT, working on PSILOCYBIN on top of the MDMA now." (shrooms c0017); "Help write "TRANS" above the flag" (TransFlagPlace c0211, rivals c0248); "TWEAKERS OF R/DRUGS, LETS CHANGE MDMA TO SAY METH BECAUSE WHY THE FUCK NOT" (drugs c0165)

T3-069 concentrating effort on fewer pieces

The room drops or pauses some of its pieces to put its pixels on one: one priority, one attack point, the rest abandoned. Floor: theblackvoid and day9, unlike in size (theblackvoid holds 9,430 items in the window and day9 361, over twice as many).

• Must show: Effort concentrated: one piece named the priority, others abandoned or paused, 'all focus on this', a design scaled down to fit the hands.
• Must not show: Upkeep chosen over growth with no piece dropped (T3-042); the room's strength doubted (T3-136); placers held to one template (T3-091).
• Decide when both: Concentrating and doubting in one theme: T3-069 when the room acts on the choice, T3-136 when it doubts.
• Against T3-042: Is one of the room's pieces dropped for another (T3-069), or growth set aside to keep what it holds (T3-042)?
• Against T3-136: Does the room put its pixels on fewer pieces (T3-069), or doubt it can manage any (T3-136)?
• Against T3-091: Are the room's pieces narrowed to fewer (T3-069), or placers held to one design of one piece (T3-091)?
• Varies: From abandoning a television to save a face to a faction's single attack point; pieces scaled down to the hands at hand.
• Is not: Refusing a new front to keep the existing mark (T3-042).
• Exemplars: "Should we abandon the TV? Just allow the Day [9] to survive?" (day9 c0021); "New Attack Point - ALL FOCUS ON THIS" (theblackvoid c0650); "The priority will always be BM and Sakura Gakuin." (babymetal c0242)

T3-082 finding the room's mark placed

Members find a mark of their room already on the canvas, made by others or without them, and point to it. Floor: globaloffensive and Madeon, unlike in size (globaloffensive holds 34,561 items in the window and Madeon 106, over twice as many).

• Must show: Members discovering the room's subject already drawn on the canvas: 'someone made our flag', 'found a Northwestern N', 'there already is one', asking who made it.
• Must not show: Outsiders led to the sub by its mark (T3-044); the room announcing work it made (T3-026).
• Decide when both: Whose eyes find the mark: the room's own members finding work they did not know of go to T3-082; outsiders led to the sub go to T3-044.
• Against T3-044: Do the room's members find their own mark (T3-082), or are outsiders led to the sub by it (T3-044)?
• Against T3-026: Is a mark found that the room did not know of (T3-082), or the room's own work announced (T3-026)?
• Against T3-175: Is the room's own subject found drawn (T3-082), or another's sign adopted as the room's (T3-175)?
• Against T3-052: Is another picture remarked on (T3-052), or the room's own mark found already placed (T3-082)?
• Varies: From surprise at a logo someone made to members joining the work they found.
• Is not: A visitor finding the sub through its mark (T3-044).
• Exemplars: "Found a Northwestern N on Reddit's new April Fool's project" (Northwestern c0001); "Someone made a 1g on /r/place" (globaloffensive c0224); "Look who's made an appearance on r/Place..." (Madeon c0032)

T3-175 adopting a sign others began

The room adopts as its own a sign others began: a neighbour's character made a mascot, a stray symbol claimed. Floor: portugal and httyd, unlike in size (portugal holds 5,785 items in the window and httyd 84, over twice as many).

• Must show: A work begun by others taken up by the room as its own: a mascot adopted, a character given the room's nationality or creed, a stray symbol claimed.
• Must not show: Another's art converted by placing over it (T3-068); the room's own subject found drawn (T3-082).
• Decide when both: Adopting with a recolouring: T3-068 when the art is placed over, T3-175 when it is claimed with little or no change.
• Against T3-068: Is another's art recoloured into the room's (T3-068), or adopted with little or no change (T3-175)?
• Against T3-082: Is the room's own subject found drawn (T3-082), or another's sign taken up as the room's (T3-175)?
• Against T3-071: Is the room's work adopted by a neighbour (T3-071), or another's sign adopted by the room (T3-175)?
• Against T3-137: Does the room take another's sign as its own (T3-175), or put its pixels into another group's build (T3-137)?
• Varies: From Squirtle made a Portuguese hero to a party parrot declared a comrade.
• Is not: Painting the room's flag over a neighbour's work (T3-068).
• Exemplars: "Squirtle Camões a mascote oficial do /r/portugal!" (portugal c0312); "Si Portugal tiene adoptó a Squirtle como su mascota, deberíamos adoptar al yoshi" (mexico c0118); "COMRADE PARTY PARROT DOING HIS PART IN BASHING THE FASH" (fullcommunism c0106, rivals c0141)

T3-187 handing the work over

A member who led the work hands it to the community: maintainership passed on, the project kept community-run, a leader stepping down. Floor: SquareSpiral and haskell, unlike in size (SquareSpiral holds 1,365 items in the window and haskell 635, over twice as many).

• Must show: A leader or organiser passing the work's care to the community, keeping it community-run, or stepping down from it.
• Must not show: A member quitting under strain (T3-181); one member put in charge (T3-101).
• Decide when both: A leader stepping down tired: T3-181 when strain is the reason, T3-187 when the work is passed on.
• Against T3-101: Is one member put in charge (T3-101), or does the leader hand the work to all (T3-187)?
• Against T3-181: Does a member quit under strain (T3-181), or pass the work on (T3-187)?
• Varies: From open-source maintainership passed to the community before a flight to a moderator retiring after a last tile.
• Is not: A member quitting because the work became stressful (T3-181).
• Exemplars: "I'm passing on this open source maintainership of these pixels to you the community." (haskell c0023); "though I like the idea of this being a community run thing with you guys." (splatoon c0087); "I'm retiring as mod and I've placed my last tile." (SquareSpiral c0113)

G09 defending and repairing the work

T3-005 defending the work against attackers

Members rally to defend the room's work against an attack under way: alarms, calls to fight back and hold, reports of attacks staved off. Floor: naruto and gatech, unlike in size (naruto holds 3,975 items in the window and gatech 919, over twice as many).

• Must show: An attack on the room's work and the room's answer: alarms, calls to defend or fight back, holding the line, reports of an attack repelled.
• Must not show: Watching for damage and repairing it, with or without an attacker in view, where no fight is called (T3-021); naming or tracing the attacker (T3-087); pleading with the attackers (T3-139); attacking others' work (G12).
• Decide when both: Defence and repair: T3-005 when the attack and the fight lead, T3-021 when the watching and fixing do; tracing who attacked in concepts of its own adds T3-087.
• Against T3-021: Is an attack fought (T3-005), or the work watched and fixed with or without an attacker in view (T3-021)?
• Against T3-087: Is the attack fought (T3-005), or its source traced (T3-087)?
• Against T3-139: Do members fight the attack (T3-005), or ask the attackers to stop (T3-139)?
• Against T3-006: Is the room's own work defended (T3-005), or another's work attacked (T3-006)?
• Against T3-081: Is the defence told as a fight (T3-005), or cast as a historic national war (T3-081)?
• Against T3-011: Is the room's own work defended (T3-005), or another room's work helped or defended by the room's members, a pledge to protect it included (T3-011)?
• Against T3-002: Is the call to build or finish (T3-002), or to defend against an attack under way (T3-005)?
• Against T3-055: Are attackers fought off (T3-005), or the mark's shape changed against them (T3-055)?
• Against T3-123: Is an attack fought off (T3-005), or a request to yield refused (T3-123)?
• Against T3-124: Is the attack fought off (T3-005), or is fighting one option weighed against another (T3-124)?
• Against T3-141: Is an attack fought off (T3-005), or the night covered (T3-141)?
• Against T3-195: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or the room's own work defended, the pledge named only as the reason for the defence (T3-005)?
• Varies: From one alarm to day-long defence against bots, raids and the Void; defenders outnumbered or victorious.
• Is not: Cleaning stray pixels from the room's work with no attacker named (T3-021).
• Exemplars: "We are under attack by Virginia Tech. Stay strong!" (gatech c0007); "People are trying to kill our 4136121025 on Place. Let's get back to Place and fight them!" (homestuck c0105); "r/Naruto is under attack in r/Place! This is not a drill!" (naruto c0134)

T3-007 urging repair over retaliation

Rare tier. After an attack, members urge the room to repair its work rather than strike back.

• Must show: A call to answer damage by repairing instead of retaliating against the attacker.
• Must not show: Repairing with no word on retaliation (T3-021); stopping an attack the room itself started (T3-076).
• Decide when both: A theme that fights and then urges repair: T3-005 primary when the fight leads, T3-007 added when the call against retaliation has a concept of its own.
• Against T3-021: Is the work simply repaired (T3-021), or repair urged instead of striking back (T3-007)?
• Against T3-076: Is an attack the room started stopped (T3-076), or retaliation for damage it suffered declined (T3-007)?
• Varies: From one call to repair and coexist again to a member saying striking back is not the way.
• Is not: Telling members to stop an attack the room began unprovoked (T3-076).
• Exemplars: "Let's focus on repairing it on not attack what they've built." (sixers c0054); "striking back's not a good way to go." (parahumans c0007)

T3-008 messaging individual placers to stop

Members contact individual placers who damage the work, by private message or by name, and ask them to stop or tell them the plan. Floor: formula1 and necrodancer, unlike in size (formula1 holds 9,642 items in the window and necrodancer 321, over twice as many).

• Must show: Individual placers singled out and contacted: private messages to those placing wrong pixels, users named, a placer checked through their posting history and asked to stop.
• Must not show: Pleading with an attacking room as a whole (T3-139); tracing who changed the pixels with no contact (T3-087); banning the room's own vandals (T3-121).
• Decide when both: Tracing a placer and then messaging them: T3-087 when the tracing leads, T3-008 when the contact does.
• Against T3-139: Is a room asked to stop (T3-139), or individual placers contacted (T3-008)?
• Against T3-087: Is the placer only traced (T3-087), or contacted and asked to stop (T3-008)?
• Against T3-121: Is the placer asked (T3-008), or banned (T3-121)?
• Varies: From friendly private messages explaining the plan to naming repeat defacers in the thread.
• Is not: A post asking a whole room to stop its attack (T3-139).
• Exemplars: "PMing the users doing that." (formula1 c0131); "I've been repairing the art and PM-ing users that place grey pixels on top of the art letting them know what the plan is." (necrodancer c0083); "I've been sending every new one I see this and 95% of them have been stopping" (sixers c0056)

T3-021 watching and repairing the work

Members keep watch over the room's work and repair it: fixing changed and stray pixels, cleaning, keeping it intact over hours. Floor: newzealand and luxembourg, unlike in size (newzealand holds 8,226 items in the window and luxembourg 60, over twice as many).

• Must show: Upkeep of the work: watching it, fixing changed pixels, cleaning stray ones, routines of repair, reports of damage to be fixed. Repair during a raid counts here when the fixing leads and no fight is called.
• Must not show: An attack fought as such (T3-005); the mark reshaped against tampering (T3-055); watch through the night arranged as shifts (T3-141); a script that repairs (T3-028).
• Decide when both: Fight and upkeep: see T3-005. Upkeep with night shifts: T3-021 primary, T3-141 added when the shifts have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-005: Is the work watched and fixed (T3-021), or an attack fought (T3-005)?
• Against T3-141: Is the work kept (T3-021), or kept through the hours others sleep, in shifts (T3-141)?
• Against T3-055: Is the mark restored as it was (T3-021), or changed in shape against tampering (T3-055)?
• Against T3-038: Is the work first built (T3-038), or kept and restored (T3-021)?
• Against T3-028: Is it kept by hand (T3-021), or by a script (T3-028)?
• Against T3-007: Is the work simply repaired (T3-021), or repair urged instead of striking back (T3-007)?
• Against T3-042: Is the work repaired (T3-021), or upkeep argued as the room's priority over growth (T3-042)?
• Against T3-073: Is what happened told (T3-073), or the work watched and repaired (T3-021)?
• Against T3-146: Is a hate symbol or slur covered (T3-146), or the work repaired of other damage, obscene drawings included (T3-021)?
• Varies: From a morning routine of cleaning a logo to hours of watching one small figure.
• Is not: Running a script that restores the work (T3-028).
• Exemplars: "My morning routine the last couple days: Wake up, check the news, clean up the Florida logo" (floridagators c0114); "Yes, I've had my eye on it for the last 2 hours or so" (luxembourg c0013); "But most importantly we must keep the kiwi, text and boarder clean" (newzealand c0229)

T3-022 relocating after losing the spot

After the work is erased or overrun, the room moves it: a new spot, a smaller version elsewhere, starting again. Floor: aceattorney and seolhyun, unlike in size (aceattorney holds 987 items in the window and seolhyun 41, over twice as many).

• Must show: The work moved or restarted elsewhere because it was destroyed, overpowered or crowded out: new coordinates after a loss, 'we've moved', 'we will have to find someplace else'.
• Must not show: The first choice of a spot (T3-020); weighing whether to move (T3-124); moving because a neighbour asked for the space (T3-039).
• Decide when both: Weighing and then moving: T3-124 for the weighing, T3-022 for the move; both with concepts of their own, rule 0.
• Against T3-020: Is a spot chosen in the first place (T3-020), or a new one found after a loss (T3-022)?
• Against T3-124: Is the move weighed (T3-124), or made (T3-022)?
• Against T3-039: Does the room move because its work was lost (T3-022), or because a neighbour asked for the space (T3-039)?
• Against T3-054: Does the work move to a new spot on the same canvas (T3-022), or to another canvas (T3-054)?
• Against T3-029: Is the lost work grieved (T3-029), or moved or restarted elsewhere (T3-022)?
• Varies: From one quick move after an erasure to a run of moves and shrinkings as the canvas fills.
• Is not: Moving aside when a neighbour asks for room (T3-039).
• Exemplars: "nah, we've moved, some assholes erased all of it" (donaldglover c0047, rivals c0032); "Phoenixs finger is destroyed we will have to find someplace else" (aceattorney c0025); "At this point, I believe it's in our best interest to find a different location." (seolhyun c0007)

T3-139 pleading with attackers to stop

Members ask the room or group damaging their work to stop or spare it: 'please don't destroy our logo'. Floor: ainbowroad and mcgill, unlike in size (ainbowroad holds 9,887 items in the window and mcgill 498, over twice as many).

• Must show: Requests addressed to an attacking room or group to stop, spare the work, or let it live.
• Must not show: Fighting the attack (T3-005); messaging individual placers (T3-008); asking a host room for space before any damage (T3-035).
• Decide when both: Pleading inside a border deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-139 added when the pleading has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-005: Do members fight the attack (T3-005), or ask the attackers to stop (T3-139)?
• Against T3-008: Is a group or room asked (T3-139), or individual placers contacted (T3-008)?
• Against T3-035: Is space asked for (T3-035), or an attack asked to stop (T3-139)?
• Against T3-046: Is the fairness of covering others' work argued (T3-046), or the covering asked to stop (T3-139)?
• Against T3-076: Are the room's own attackers stopped (T3-076), or another room's attackers asked to stop (T3-139)?
• Against T3-010: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or another room's attackers asked to stop (T3-139)?
• Varies: From a polite request posted in the attacker's own thread to angry demands that a faction end its expansion.
• Is not: A request to a host for room before any damage (T3-035).
• Exemplars: "Please don't destroy our N7 and Garrus logo please!" (placestart c0326, rivals c0435 c0412); "Red chiken wld happily live in one of ur tentacles pls stop severing chaken in half" (mcgill c0047); "Please don't delete the Darth Plagueis text" (ainbowroad c0624, rivals c1147)

G10 finding who changed the work

T3-058 blaming attackers after the close

After the canvas closes, members blame the room that destroyed or attacked their work, and keep the grievance alive. Floor: survivor and uoft, unlike in size (survivor holds 10,576 items in the window and uoft 1,966, over twice as many).

• Must show: Blame laid after the close (hour 73 on) on a named room or group for damage to the work: accounts of who destroyed it, curses, grievances kept up.
• Must not show: Tracing an attacker while placement goes on (T3-087); blaming moderators or admins (T3-118); mourning with no blame (T3-029).
• Decide when both: Blame and mourning after the close: T3-029 when the loss leads, T3-058 when the blame does.
• Against T3-087: Is the culprit sought during placement (T3-087), or blamed after the close (T3-058)?
• Against T3-029: Is the lost work mourned (T3-029), or a room blamed for it (T3-058)?
• Against T3-118: Is an attacking room blamed (T3-058), or the moderators or admins (T3-118)?
• Against T3-050: Are taunts traded with a rival as sport (T3-050), or blame laid for a loss (T3-058)?
• Against T3-030: Is a rival blamed for a loss (T3-058), or an ally's conduct disputed (T3-030)?
• Against T3-073: Is what happened to the work told (T3-073), or a named room blamed for its loss after the close (T3-058)?
• Varies: From a curse on a nation's sub kept alive as a meme to careful accounts of who ruined what in the last hour.
• Is not: Members working out during placement who is changing their pixels (T3-087).
• Exemplars: "Fuck Thailand But hey at least we made it onto a piece of Internet history." (uoft c0182); "in the final hour of the canvas being open, r/Denmark destroyed our logo... RIP" (survivor c0320); "Fuck /r/Denmark" (frankocean c0210, rivals c0203)

T3-087 tracing who changed the work

Members work out who changed their work or who sent a call: checking placers, naming rooms, reading signs of bots or scripts. Floor: smite and AcePlace, unlike in size (smite holds 14,286 items in the window and AcePlace 601, over twice as many).

• Must show: Finding out who is altering the work or who is behind a call: asking who keeps changing it, checking placers' posting histories, naming the room or bot responsible, members saying the damage is not the room's own.
• Must not show: Fighting the attack (T3-005); blame laid after the close (T3-058); an organised room setting its plan apart from placers it does not control (T3-188).
• Decide when both: Tracing with defence: T3-005 primary when the fight leads, T3-087 added when the tracing has concepts of its own. Members doubting that a damage was the room's own are tracing it (T3-087); an organised room telling others its plan does not cover such placers is T3-188.
• Against T3-005: Is the attack fought (T3-005), or its source traced (T3-087)?
• Against T3-058: Is the culprit sought during placement (T3-087), or blamed after the close (T3-058)?
• Against T3-188: Do members work out who did it (T3-087), or does an organised room tell others that such placers are not under its control (T3-188)?
• Against T3-170: Is the culprit sought (T3-087), or found to be a friend or one's own mistake (T3-170)?
• Against T3-132: Is the source traced from the pixels and what others say (T3-087), or learned from inside a rival's chat (T3-132)?
• Against T3-121: Do members find out or name who is damaging the work (T3-087), or exclude a member who did, by a ban, a kick or a call to moderators to throw them out (T3-121)?
• Against T3-008: Is the placer only traced (T3-087), or contacted and asked to stop (T3-008)?
• Against T3-045: Is who altered the work traced (T3-087), or who was at the spot first argued (T3-045)?
• Varies: From 'who keeps putting green in our logo?' to reading usernames and posting histories; bots and scripts suspected; who sent a call traced.
• Is not: An organised room telling a neighbour that placers in its name are not under its control (T3-188).
• Exemplars: "anyone know who keeps fucking with the letters?" (AcePlace c0053); "clicked on the user who put it on there.. and they have been posting on the smite reddit alot.." (smite c0370); "jeeze finland has a huge amount of space who keeps fucking putting green in our shit???" (chibears c0086)

T3-118 blaming moderators for a loss

Members blame the sub's moderators, or the site's admins, for a loss: their prank, their removals, help they denied, a rigged game. Floor: prequelmemes and anarcho_capitalism, unlike in size (prequelmemes holds 11,884 items in the window and anarcho_capitalism 2,937, over twice as many).

• Must show: Blame for the room's loss or failure laid on moderators or admins: their April Fools change, their removals, denied requests for help, the canvas said to be rigged.
• Must not show: Blame laid on an attacking room (T3-058); objections to a removal with no loss in view (T3-063, T3-185).
• Decide when both: A loss blamed on both a room and the moderators: the target with more concepts decides.
• Against T3-058: Is an attacking room blamed (T3-058), or the moderators or admins (T3-118)?
• Against T3-063: Is a removal contested (T3-063), or a loss laid at the moderators' door (T3-118)?
• Against T3-032: Is the moderators' joke objected to as a joke (T3-032), or blamed for a loss (T3-118)?
• Against T3-185: Are moderators or admins blamed for a loss (T3-118), or a change to the sub's posting rules made and argued with no loss in view (T3-185)?
• Varies: From a joke that a defeat will be the moderators' fault to suspicions that admins added touches to the canvas.
• Is not: Contesting a single removal under the sub's rules (T3-063).
• Exemplars: "If we lose it's the mods fault" (chelseafc c0048, rivals c0088 c0081); "When /r/prequelmemes mods pretend to be protectors of the /r/place Tragedy text after denying multiple requests for aid" (prequelmemes c0508); "I almost wonder if the admins helped some things or added in their final touches." (anarcho_capitalism c0165)

T3-121 excluding the room's own vandals

The room sanctions its own members who damage the work or the room by exclusion: bans from the chat or sub, kicking, shunning, calling them traitors. Floor: AmericanFlaginPlace and ufl, unlike in size (AmericanFlaginPlace holds 4,544 items in the window and ufl 290, over twice as many).

• Must show: Exclusion used as a sanction against the room's own members: bans from the Discord or the sub, kicking, shunning a 'traitor', members reported so moderators throw them out, such a ban challenged or reversed.
• Must not show: Messaging placers to stop (T3-008); posts removed under the sub's rules (T3-063); bigotry shut down in chat (T3-182).
• Decide when both: A ban for bigoted talk: T3-182 when the bigotry leads, T3-121 when the exclusion does.
• Against T3-008: Is the placer asked to stop (T3-008), or excluded (T3-121)?
• Against T3-063: Is a post removed under the sub's rules (T3-063), or a member excluded as a sanction (T3-121)?
• Against T3-182: Is bigotry in chat shut down (T3-182), or a member sanctioned by exclusion for damage to the work or the room (T3-121)?
• Against T3-076: Is the room's attack reined in by words (T3-076), or a member excluded (T3-121)?
• Against T3-087: Do members find out or name who is damaging the work (T3-087), or exclude a member who did, by a ban, a kick or a call to moderators to throw them out (T3-121)?
• Varies: From shunning a single traitor to a three-day cooling-off; a ban from the room's Discord challenged and reversed.
• Is not: A moderator removing a post that breaks the sub's rules (T3-063).
• Exemplars: "that guy was banned from the server" (roosterteeth c0088); "SHUN THE NONBELIEVER" (ufl c0031, rivals c0030); "Use that report button so our mods can throw out the trolls spreading disinformation" (AmericanFlaginPlace c0502)

T3-126 disputing who speaks for rooms

Members dispute who may speak or decide for a room toward others: false claims to be its moderator or representative, denials of being one, outsiders told not to decide for its work, no one yet able to speak for the placers. Floor: crusaderkings and rainbowgrid, unlike in size (crusaderkings holds 3,660 items in the window and rainbowgrid 33, over twice as many).

• Must show: Contest or statement about who represents a room toward others: a claimed representative or moderator challenged; someone denying they speak for the room; outsiders told they cannot decide for the room's work; members saying no group yet exists to speak for the placers.
• Must not show: Disputes over the room's own chat's authority inside the room (T3-114); an organised room disowning placers it cannot control (T3-188).
• Decide when both: Separating the organised plan from placers it does not control is T3-188; who may speak for the room is T3-126.
• Against T3-114: Is the room's own chat's power inside the room disputed (T3-114), or who speaks for the room to others (T3-126)?
• Against T3-188: Is the right to speak for the room disputed (T3-126), or placers outside the plan disowned (T3-188)?
• Against T3-194: Does a member act as the room's envoy (T3-194), or is the right to do so disputed or denied (T3-126)?
• Against T3-101: Is someone put in charge of the work (T3-101), or is it disputed who speaks for the room outward (T3-126)?
• Against T3-094: Is it disputed who speaks for a room (T3-126), or who may approve a spot (T3-094)?
• Against T3-180: Is it disputed who speaks for the room (T3-126), or who belongs to the nation (T3-180)?
• Varies: From a false moderator claim exposed to a random member denying they are the official mediator; a room telling other Discords not to decide for its art; a pattern's repeaters with no one to speak for them.
• Is not: A room telling a neighbour that rogue placers act against its plan (T3-188).
• Exemplars: "w-wait man im just some random guy not the official mediator" (jerma985 c0030); "Please don't pretend like you can make decisions about the artwork that was started by us." (crusaderkings c0051); "i don't think there's coordination yet of the people doing the rainbow grid??? unless i missed it??? so there's no way yet to get people to lay off of repeating the exact same grid" (rainbowgrid c0003)

T3-170 mistaking friendly work for vandalism

Members find that what looked like vandalism was friendly work or their own mistake, and own or forgive it. Floor: smite and placesnek, unlike in size (smite holds 14,286 items in the window and placesnek 470, over twice as many).

• Must show: Damage that turns out friendly: an ally's or neighbour's work taken for vandalism and then recognised; members' own misclicks or misplaced pixels owned and forgiven; help that went wrong.
• Must not show: Tracing a hostile attacker (T3-087); apologising to a neighbour for damage the room did to their work (T3-040); damage done for fun (T3-192).
• Decide when both: Tracing that ends in finding a friend: T3-087 when the search leads, T3-170 when the recognition and the owning do.
• Against T3-087: Is the culprit sought (T3-087), or found to be a friend or one's own mistake (T3-170)?
• Against T3-040: Is the friendly mistake inside the room's own or allied work (T3-170), or damage the room did to a neighbour's work (T3-040)?
• Against T3-192: Was the damage a mistake (T3-170), or done for fun (T3-192)?
• Varies: From a community's lettering undone as vandalism and then recognised to a newcomer's accidental pixel apologised for.
• Is not: Apologising to a neighbouring room for covering its art (T3-040).
• Exemplars: "something I'd been undoing earlier as vandalism was actually a community attempt to write "SNOOT BOOP"" (placesnek c0104); "We thought you were making a cross and tried to complete it!" (crusaderkings c0016); "I accidently did it im sorry D: I really did not mean to do it" (smite c0375)

T3-188 disowning placers outside the plan

An organised room tells others that placers acting in its name or against its plan are not under its control: rogues, the hivemind, individuals outside its chat. Floor: ainbowroad and gatech, unlike in size (ainbowroad holds 9,887 items in the window and gatech 919, over twice as many).

• Must show: A room, or its organisers, setting its plan apart from placers it does not control: 'we are not for that person', 'there are rogues outside our Discord', 'the hivemind works in mysterious ways', offers to repair what the rogues did.
• Must not show: A room saying it has no plan at all (T3-125); moderators disowning the canvas work as a whole (T3-140); members of a room doubting a damage was theirs, or a bare denial pointing at another room (T3-087).
• Decide when both: An outside room's denial counts when it separates its organised members from placers acting in its name (a fandom room's Danish members, a crusader room's Norwegian ally); a bare 'it was not us' that points to another room is tracing (T3-087). Separating the plan from such placers is T3-188; who may speak for the room is T3-126.
• Against T3-087: Does an organised room say the placers are not under its control (T3-188), or do members work out who did it, the room's own members doubting it was theirs included (T3-087)?
• Against T3-125: Does the room set its plan apart from placers outside it (T3-188), or say it has no plan (T3-125)?
• Against T3-126: Are placers outside the plan disowned (T3-188), or is the right to speak for the room disputed (T3-126)?
• Against T3-076: Does the room rein in its own attackers (T3-076), or say the placers are not its own (T3-188)?
• Against T3-140: Do moderators say the sub has no canvas project at all (T3-140), or does the room set its project apart from rogues (T3-188)?
• Against T3-195: Does an organised room say it does not control placers acting in its name (T3-188), or hold another room to an agreement (T3-195)?
• Against T3-049: Is the plan itself scattered (T3-049), or are placers acting against a plan set apart from the room (T3-188)?
• Varies: From one disowned rogue in a chat to national rooms saying their plans do not control every placer of their nation; offers to repair the rogues' damage.
• Is not: A room that says it has no plan and wings it (T3-125).
• Exemplars: "We are not for that person in the discord. We completely disagree with them entirely." (ainbowroad c0042, rivals c0386 c0593); "We are trying avoiding cutting through you guys, but there are some rogues outside our discord" (gatech c0077, rivals c0072); "There will always be some rogue kids ruining stuff. Just make sure to rebuild it." (denmark c0198, rivals c0285)

T3-192 griefing the work for fun

Members grief a work for fun, the room's own or another's, and own it or joke about it. Floor: pcmasterrace and paladins, unlike in size (pcmasterrace holds 40,459 items in the window and paladins 5,823, over twice as many).

• Must show: Damage done for amusement: letters or numbers changed into jokes, a dot kept in a logo to annoy defenders, griefing to watch others react; admissions and jokes about doing it, the room's own work included.
• Must not show: Attacks made for the room's ends (T3-006, T3-061); mistakes owned (T3-170).
• Decide when both: A joke defacement called for as the room's attack on a rival: T3-006; done by a member for amusement: T3-192.
• Against T3-006: Is a rival's work defaced for the room (T3-006), or any work, the room's own included, griefed for fun (T3-192)?
• Against T3-170: Was the damage a mistake (T3-170), or done for fun (T3-192)?
• Against T3-031: Is the joke played by damaging the work (T3-192), or told in talk (T3-031)?
• Against T3-177: Is the griefing for fun with no hate symbol (T3-192), or a swastika called for (T3-177)?
• Against T3-061: Is a work griefed for fun and owned as a joke (T3-192), or the room's work pushed into a neighbour's space for its own ends (T3-061)?
• Varies: From turning 60 into 69 on the room's own logo to griefing a rival's logo to hear its fans complain.
• Is not: A member admitting a misclick (T3-170).
• Exemplars: "Really sad how people take this so srsly, im griefing it a lot just to enjoy hearing the kiddos cry" (paladins c0215, rivals c0209); "I'm working on restoring the 60 fps. But i changed it to 69. because i have the mind of a 12 year old." (pcmasterrace c0889); "I'll admit it, I changed it to that a few times." (prequelmemes c0684)

G11 scripts, bots and extra accounts

T3-027 arguing whether scripts are fair

Members argue whether scripts and bots are fair: cheating or common practice, against the spirit of the canvas or the only way to hold ground. Floor: globaloffensive and Thegreatblackhole, unlike in size (globaloffensive holds 34,561 items in the window and Thegreatblackhole 187, over twice as many).

• Must show: Argument about scripts or bots as such: called cheating, embarrassing or beneath the room; defended as what every large community does; judged to spoil the canvas; bot rumours, and claims that a defence was scripts and not people.
• Must not show: Running or sharing a script with no argument over its fairness (T3-028); placing beyond the limit with extra accounts (T3-088).
• Decide when both: Running and arguing: T3-028 primary when the scripts are run, T3-027 added when the argument has concepts of its own. A bot rumour, or saying a defence was scripts rather than people, goes here when fairness is in question.
• Against T3-028: Are scripts run (T3-028), or is their fairness argued (T3-027)?
• Against T3-088: Are extra accounts used (T3-088), or the fairness of automation argued (T3-027)?
• Against T3-179: Is the fairness of scripts argued (T3-027), or a political ideology argued from the canvas (T3-179)?
• Against T3-037: Is the canvas's worth argued (T3-037), or the fairness of its scripts (T3-027)?
• Varies: From one jab at a rival's cheating to long threads on whether automation is moral; pride in hand work; rumours that a rival is botting.
• Is not: A member sharing a script and how to run it (T3-028).
• Exemplars: "Isn't it more embarrassing that you're cheating with scripts?" (unitedkingdom c0264); "what's unfair about it? every community that has big portions of the board uses a script" (globaloffensive c0824); "Our community must remain independent of bot trash. Those tactics are beneath us." (Thegreatblackhole c0078)

T3-028 running scripts for the work

Members write, share and run scripts or bots that place or keep the room's work. Floor: TheFarLeftSide and archlinux, unlike in size (TheFarLeftSide holds 3,737 items in the window and archlinux 976, over twice as many).

• Must show: Scripts or bots made, shared, installed or run for the room's work: links and instructions, the script repairing the mark, errors and updates.
• Must not show: Arguing whether scripts are fair (T3-027); extra accounts with no script (T3-088); stale scripts switched off (T3-089).
• Decide when both: Running and arguing: see T3-027. Stale scripts switched off in concepts of their own add T3-089; extra accounts add T3-088.
• Against T3-027: Are scripts run (T3-028), or is their fairness argued (T3-027)?
• Against T3-088: Is placing automated (T3-028), or multiplied by extra accounts (T3-088)?
• Against T3-089: Are scripts run for the plan (T3-028), or stopped because they fight it (T3-089)?
• Against T3-108: Is the bot the room's own (T3-028), or one target pooled with other rooms (T3-108)?
• Against T3-070: Is a template shared for placing by hand (T3-070), or a script that places (T3-028)?
• Against T3-021: Is it kept by hand (T3-021), or by a script (T3-028)?
• Against T3-120: Do members run the script on their own accounts (T3-028), or lend accounts for someone else's bot (T3-120)?
• Against T3-176: Is the script run for the room's own work (T3-028), or slipped to a rival against it (T3-176)?
• Varies: From one member offering a way to draw automatically to sub-wide bot armies with install guides; scripts that repair a mark overnight.
• Is not: A template posted for placing by hand (T3-070).
• Exemplars: "To use it, install TamperMonkey, load https://www.reddit.com/place?webview=true, and let the script do its work." (TheFarLeftSide c0506); "anyone wishing to join the bot army install the nodejs script" (archlinux c0157); "So I may or may not have a way to draw on /r/place automatically. Hit me up." (tagpro c0036)

T3-088 placing beyond the pixel limit

Members place more than the one-pixel limit allows: extra accounts, alts, throwaway accounts, glitches used to place more. Floor: bitcoin and uofm, unlike in size (bitcoin holds 11,315 items in the window and uofm 729, over twice as many).

• Must show: Placing beyond the limit by any means: alts and throwaway accounts made or used, many accounts per member, glitches exploited to place more.
• Must not show: Scripts as such (T3-028) unless they run on extra accounts; coping with the limit while building (T3-074); accounts lent to another's bot (T3-120).
• Decide when both: A script run on extra accounts: T3-028 for the script, T3-088 added when the accounts have concepts of their own. Glitches: using one to place beyond the limit is T3-088, coping with one that stops or delays placing is T3-074, explaining one is T3-016.
• Against T3-028: Is placing automated (T3-028), or multiplied by extra accounts or a glitch (T3-088)?
• Against T3-074: Is the limit worked within (T3-074), or broken (T3-088)?
• Against T3-120: Does a member place more with their own accounts (T3-088), or lend them to another's bot (T3-120)?
• Against T3-110: Are extra placements made (T3-088), or a tile offered as payment (T3-110)?
• Against T3-027: Are extra accounts used (T3-088), or the fairness of automation argued (T3-027)?
• Varies: From a reminder that alt accounts work too to plans for multi-account scripts; members insisting the work is manual despite many accounts.
• Is not: Working within the cooldown while building (T3-074).
• Exemplars: "Reminder that alt accounts work too." (bitcoin c0149); "I made two more reddit accounts to assist in protecting" (uofm c0008); "Lol spent better part of 2 hours and 3 accounts on this. XD" (zootopia c0100)

T3-089 switching off stale scripts

Members find the room's own scripts fighting its plan (old versions, wrong templates) and switch them off or update them. Floor: bitcoin and evex, unlike in size (bitcoin holds 11,315 items in the window and evex 120, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's scripts or bots working against its own current plan: old versions overwriting, bots fighting each other or a neighbour's agreed space, calls to stop or update them.
• Must not show: Running scripts with no conflict (T3-028); a script edited to spare a neighbour as an agreed change (T3-168).
• Decide when both: Running and switching off in one theme: T3-028 primary, T3-089 added when the switching off has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-028: Are scripts run for the plan (T3-028), or stopped because they fight it (T3-089)?
• Against T3-168: Is a script stopped because it fights the room's own plan (T3-089), or edited to spare a neighbour (T3-168)?
• Against T3-091: Are hand placers held to the current plan (T3-091), or scripts brought into line with it (T3-089)?
• Varies: From one member stopping an old script that overwrote a flag to rooms finding their bots fighting each other after a template changed.
• Is not: A script revised to leave a neighbour's border alone (T3-168).
• Exemplars: "The old script writes over the american flag so I stopped it." (bitcoin c0481, rivals c0128); "Make sure to stop running the old script and update it" (evex c0083, rivals c0074); "Mja, borimo se proti lastnim botom in skriptam :D" (slovenia c0058)

T3-108 sharing one bot target

Rooms pool one bot map or target so that a shared script keeps several rooms' works. Floor: theitalyplace and aeon, unlike in size (theitalyplace holds 1,302 items in the window and aeon 27, over twice as many).

• Must show: A bot's target or map shared across rooms: other rooms' logos added to it, a target shared with another nation's room, scripts merged so another room can use them.
• Must not show: A room's own script (T3-028); members lending accounts to another room's bot (T3-120).
• Decide when both: A shared target agreed in a deal: T3-151 when the trade of help leads, T3-108 when the pooled target does.
• Against T3-028: Is the bot's target the room's alone (T3-028), or pooled with other rooms (T3-108)?
• Against T3-120: Do rooms share one target (T3-108), or do members lend their accounts to another's bot (T3-120)?
• Against T3-151: Is help traded between rooms (T3-151), or one bot target pooled (T3-108)?
• Varies: From kindred Linux rooms on one bitmap to Italy's script target shared with the English.
• Is not: A member lending their accounts to another room's bot (T3-120).
• Exemplars: "da adesso il target è condiviso con gli inglesi per una migliore difesa!" (theitalyplace c0155); "/r/place bot map for both tux and arch" (archlinux c0184, rivals c0187); "if someone wants to modify the script for the A&M flag then I'm happy to merge them together and get r/UTAustin using it" (aggies c0106)

T3-120 lending accounts to a bot

Members lend their accounts or machines to a bot, another room's or their own room's. Floor: rust and albania, unlike in size (rust holds 1,129 items in the window and albania 554, over twice as many).

• Must show: Accounts lent to a bot: members asked to run another's script or join a botnet, accounts handed over for someone else to run, manpower traded for a script.
• Must not show: Members running their own room's script on their own accounts (T3-028); a target shared among rooms (T3-108).
• Decide when both: Lending accounts in a trade between rooms: T3-151 when the trade leads, T3-120 added when the lending has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-028: Do members run the script on their own accounts (T3-028), or lend accounts for someone else's bot (T3-120)?
• Against T3-108: Do rooms share one target (T3-108), or do members lend accounts (T3-120)?
• Against T3-088: Does a member place more with their own accounts (T3-088), or lend them to a bot (T3-120)?
• Varies: From one member offering to set up lent accounts to a whole room trading its manpower for another's flag script.
• Is not: A room's members running its script on their own machines (T3-028).
• Exemplars: "DM Me if you want to lend any away (or just set them up running)" (gatech c0066); "Regardless, is there a way I can join the botnet?" (rust c0111); "Just run the script dude." (albania c0040, rivals c0039)

T3-168 editing scripts to spare neighbours

Members change the room's script so it spares a neighbour: a border left untouched, overlapping pixels removed, a shared image. Floor: rit and texastech, unlike in size (rit holds 565 items in the window and texastech 191, over twice as many).

• Must show: A script or bot edited, or asked to be edited, to leave a neighbour's work alone or keep an agreed border.
• Must not show: Turning off stale scripts that fight the room's own plan (T3-089); restraint kept by hand with no script (T3-024).
• Decide when both: A border agreed and written into the script: T3-010 for the agreement, T3-168 added when the script change has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-089: Is a script stopped because it fights the room's own plan (T3-089), or edited to spare a neighbour (T3-168)?
• Against T3-024: Is the restraint written into a script (T3-168), or kept by hand (T3-024)?
• Against T3-010: Is the border agreed (T3-010), or the script changed to keep it (T3-168)?
• Varies: From one pixel of a neighbour's border left alone to rooms checking that their scripts share one image.
• Is not: Stopping an outdated script that overwrites the room's own work (T3-089).
• Exemplars: "It leaves their 1 pixel black border" (metroid c0185); "edited the code so that your border is back to normal and we are shifted over" (texastech c0038); "Whoever set up the bots for the portal, can you make it a lighter shade of blue and remove the 2 pixels" (rit c0097)

T3-176 planting disguised scripts on rivals

Members plant a script on a rival that secretly works against it: the rival's own script modified to cover its logo, a psyop to sow distrust. Floor: completeanarchy and rit, unlike in size (completeanarchy holds 1,305 items in the window and rit 565, over twice as many).

• Must show: A script given or passed to a rival that harms it while seeming to help, and the telling of it.
• Must not show: Calls to deface a rival by hand (T3-006); running the room's own scripts (T3-028).
• Decide when both: A disguised script used in an attack the room called for: T3-006 for the call, T3-176 for the planted script.
• Against T3-006: Is the rival's work defaced by members placing (T3-006), or by a script planted on the rival (T3-176)?
• Against T3-028: Is the script run for the room's own work (T3-028), or slipped to a rival against it (T3-176)?
• Against T3-132: Is the rival watched from inside (T3-132), or harmed from inside by a script (T3-176)?
• Varies: From a rival's logo script modified to paint over it to a psyop that sowed distrust of all scripts.
• Is not: Calling members to cover a rival's logo by hand (T3-006).
• Exemplars: "I took WPI's script they are using for their logo and modified it to cover it with an orange rectangle." (rit c0081); "Then, later, when they got their own legit scripts, I told them about the psyop and sowed distrust of all scripts." (completeanarchy c0299, rivals c0298); "Haha, even a layman should have been able to see the pattern in that array of arrays." (utaustin c0176, rivals c0172)

G12 attacking others' work

T3-006 calling to deface rivals' work

Members call for, plan or carry out attacks that destroy, black out or erase another room's work. Floor: theblackvoid and UMiami, unlike in size (theblackvoid holds 9,430 items in the window and UMiami 1, over twice as many).

• Must show: Calls, plans or reports of attacks on another room's work meant to destroy or erase it: 'attack the Danish flag', 'wipe out Arizona', 'we must destroy the blue corner', strikes timed against a rival.
• Must not show: The room's work grown over a neighbour's space (T3-061); another's art turned into the room's own sign (T3-068); griefing for fun (T3-192); defending the room's work (T3-005).
• Decide when both: Replacing or attacking another room's mark, another nation's flag included: destroying or blacking it out is T3-006; turning it into the room's sign is T3-068; growing the room's work over the neighbour's space is T3-061. A theme with more than one: the larger part primary, the others under rule 0.
• Against T3-061: Is the rival's work destroyed (T3-006), or is its space taken for the room's own work (T3-061)?
• Against T3-068: Is the rival's work destroyed (T3-006), or turned into the room's own sign (T3-068)?
• Against T3-192: Is the attack called for the room (T3-006), or a member's griefing for fun (T3-192)?
• Against T3-005: Is another's work attacked (T3-006), or the room's own defended (T3-005)?
• Against T3-128: Is the call the room's own (T3-006), or a streamer's relayed (T3-128)?
• Against T3-076: Is an attack called for (T3-006), or reined in (T3-076)?
• Against T3-067: Is a rival attacked for the room (T3-006), or a third room's work bargained away to a neighbour (T3-067)?
• Against T3-085: Are flags attacked (T3-006), or weighed against the room's art (T3-085)?
• Against T3-086: Is a rival's work defaced (T3-006), or the community's own quarrel carried into the marks (T3-086)?
• Against T3-102: Is the attack called for by the room (T3-006), or pressed by a member against the room's word (T3-102)?
• Against T3-171: Is a rival's work destroyed (T3-006), or the faction's colour spread over whatever lies in its way (T3-171)?
• Against T3-176: Is the rival's work defaced by members placing (T3-006), or by a script planted on the rival (T3-176)?
• Against T3-177: Is a rival's work defaced (T3-006), or a swastika drawn (T3-177)?
• Against T3-178: Is a canvas work attacked (T3-006), or one person on another site (T3-178)?
• Varies: From one member's 'let's attack' to timed strikes with coordinates; rivalries of sport, nation, fandom and colour.
• Is not: Painting the room's colours or symbol into a neighbour's art (T3-068).
• Exemplars: "WIPE OUT ARIZONA ON r/place! B1G Only! Get Started Now!" (uofmn c0039); "Fellow erasers, we must destroy the blue corner!" (EraseThePlace c0038); "Lets attack the danish flag." (theblackvoid c1559, rivals c1721 c1009 c1177)

T3-061 pushing into a neighbour's space

The room grows its own work into space a neighbour holds: expanding over another flag or picture, taking a neighbour's ground. Floor: armenia and ChronoTrigger, unlike in size (armenia holds 1,333 items in the window and ChronoTrigger 363, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's work extended over a neighbour's space, or proposals to take it: 'take over the Hungary flag', 'keep expanding west', 'wage war for space'.
• Must not show: Destroying a rival's work with no gain of space (T3-006); converting another's art into the room's own sign (T3-068); growing into empty canvas (T3-041).
• Decide when both: See T3-006.
• Against T3-006: Is the neighbour's space taken for the room's work (T3-061), or the neighbour's work destroyed (T3-006)?
• Against T3-068: Is the room's own work grown over the neighbour (T3-061), or the neighbour's art turned into the room's sign (T3-068)?
• Against T3-041: Does the room grow into empty space or onto its own work (T3-041), or into a neighbour's space (T3-061)?
• Against T3-010: Is the space taken (T3-061), or agreed (T3-010)?
• Against T3-171: Is a picture grown into a neighbour's space (T3-061), or a colour spread as the aim (T3-171)?
• Against T3-192: Is a work griefed for fun and owned as a joke (T3-192), or the room's work pushed into a neighbour's space for its own ends (T3-061)?
• Varies: From a proposal to fight for room beside a cloud to a nation's flag pushed across its neighbours' flags.
• Is not: Adding a second piece in empty canvas (T3-041).
• Exemplars: "we could wage war with that yellow thing next to the cloud for space for her" (ChronoTrigger c0092); "Lets take the mexican flag, now is our chance." (theitalyplace c0247); "I'm gonna keep expanding west im not giving up boys" (armenia c0028)

T3-067 trading away another room's work

Rare tier. In a deal with a neighbour, a room offers to remove a third room's work.

• Must show: A third room's work offered up in a bargain between two rooms: 'I'll help get rid of the frog if we can keep ...'.
• Must not show: Help bartered with no harm to a third room (T3-151); a rival attacked directly (T3-006).
• Decide when both: The bargain is T3-151 when no third party is harmed, T3-067 when one is offered up.
• Against T3-151: Is help traded between two rooms alone (T3-151), or a third room's work offered up in the trade (T3-067)?
• Against T3-006: Is a rival attacked for the room (T3-006), or a third room's work bargained away to a neighbour (T3-067)?
• Varies: One room's offer only.
• Is not: Trading help between two rooms with no third party harmed (T3-151).
• Exemplars: "Do you have peace agreements with the frog or do you want it gone? I'll help get rid of the frog" (thailand c0146)

T3-068 converting a neighbour's art

Members turn another room's art into the room's own sign: a logo changed into theirs, a flag recoloured into the room's flag, a symbol rewritten. Floor: gratefuldead and england, unlike in size (gratefuldead holds 916 items in the window and england 62, over twice as many).

• Must show: Another's mark altered into the room's own sign or joke: 'turn their symbol into ours', 'change Finland's flag into ours', a logo rewritten with the room's letters.
• Must not show: Destroying it (T3-006); taking its space for a separate work (T3-061); adopting it unchanged (T3-175).
• Decide when both: See T3-006. A national flag chosen as target for political reasons adds T3-130 when that choice has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-006: Is the other's art turned into the room's sign (T3-068), or destroyed (T3-006)?
• Against T3-061: Is the other's art converted (T3-068), or its space taken for the room's own work (T3-061)?
• Against T3-175: Is another's sign changed into the room's (T3-068), or adopted with little or no change (T3-175)?
• Against T3-130: Is the converting the doing (T3-068), or the national politics read into the choice of target (T3-130)?
• Against T3-071: Is the work taken in with consent (T3-071), or converted by placing over it (T3-068)?
• Against T3-060: Does a member add their own piece to a mark many share (T3-060), or turn another room's art into the room's sign (T3-068)?
• Varies: From a pokeball turned into a band's emblem to national flags recoloured into the room's flag.
• Is not: Adopting a neighbour's character as a mascot with no change (T3-175).
• Exemplars: "Should we change Finland's flag into ours?" (england c0021); "turning it into a dig logo rn" (TeamDignitas c0022); "we could turn this pokeball into a stealie?" (gratefuldead c0007)

T3-128 relaying a streamer's attack call

Rare tier. Members relay a streamer's call for the audience to attack another work, and join it.

• Must show: A streamer's call to attack passed on in the room: 'call to arms from Tyler1', a streamer named as leading an attack, members asked to join the streamer's army.
• Must not show: The room's own call to attack (T3-006).
• Decide when both: A streamer's call and the room's own in one theme: T3-128 when the streamer's call leads.
• Against T3-006: Is the call the room's own (T3-006), or a streamer's relayed (T3-128)?
• Against T3-062: Are hands sought for the room's work (T3-062), or for a streamer's attack (T3-128)?
• Varies: From a one-line call to arms to a streamer's army joined by allied factions.
• Is not: A room's own members calling an attack on a rival (T3-006).
• Exemplars: "Call To Arms from Tyler1" (ice_poseidon c0171, rivals c0147); "Destiny, talking about why he's telling everyone to destroy the sign on blue's corner." (destiny c0010); "A streamer named Destiny is leading an attack on the blue corner, join us in the battle!" (PurplePixels c0122)

T3-178 brigading one person off Reddit

Members propose or join harassing one person on another site: spamming an Instagram account, screwing with an actor on Twitter. Floor: dankmemes and startrek, unlike in size (dankmemes holds 51,339 items in the window and startrek 3,498, over twice as many).

• Must show: A named or pictured individual targeted on another site by members acting together.
• Must not show: Attacks on canvas works (T3-006); taunting a rival community (T3-050).
• Decide when both: A raid on a person within a taunting theme: T3-178 when the person is targeted on another site.
• Against T3-006: Is a canvas work attacked (T3-006), or one person on another site (T3-178)?
• Against T3-050: Is a rival community taunted (T3-050), or one person harassed (T3-178)?
• Varies: From a joke request to screw with an actor on Twitter to a planned spam raid on one Instagram user.
• Is not: Taunting a rival sub (T3-050).
• Exemplars: "Ok I propose that we take down one normie at a time after our april fools fiasco" (dankmemes c0491, rivals c0492 c0496); "yo can you help us screw with Garrett Wang for April Fools on twitter?" (startrek c0052)

G13 holding back from others' work

T3-024 refusing to cover others' work

Members keep the room's work off others' art: going around it, sparing it, sizing the work so it does not cover a neighbour. Floor: wholesomememes and placesnek, unlike in size (wholesomememes holds 6,915 items in the window and placesnek 470, over twice as many).

• Must show: Restraint toward others' work kept by the room's own choice: going around a neighbour's design, refusing to overwrite it, sizing or placing the work to spare it, respect for others' effort stated.
• Must not show: Moving because a neighbour asked (T3-039); reining in the room's members who are already attacking (T3-076); restraint written into a script (T3-168); an agreed border (T3-010).
• Decide when both: Restraint inside a border deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-024 added when the restraint has concepts of its own. Sparing others' work by the room's own choice is T3-024; agreeing lines with a neighbour is T3-010.
• Against T3-010: Is a line or space agreed with a neighbour (T3-010), or others' work spared by the room's own choice (T3-024)?
• Against T3-039: Does the room yield when asked (T3-039), or keep off others' work unasked (T3-024)?
• Against T3-076: Is an attack under way stopped (T3-076), or others' work spared before any attack (T3-024)?
• Against T3-046: Is the fairness of covering argued (T3-046), or covering simply refused (T3-024)?
• Against T3-168: Is the restraint kept by hand (T3-024), or written into a script (T3-168)?
• Varies: From going around someone's chequered tiles to a room's rule of peace toward its neighbours' mascots.
• Is not: A room moving its work after a neighbour asks for the space (T3-039).
• Exemplars: "Going around someone's chequered tiles so not to spoil their design" (wholesomememes c0027); "Snek is happy to live in peace with anyone we can. We can curve around the corner of the AMD logo" (placesnek c0096); "Don't wanna destroy other people's work." (spacexmasterrace c0051)

T3-039 yielding space when asked

The room gives ground when a neighbour asks: moving, shifting or shrinking its work, giving a spot back. Floor: homestuck and paranatural, unlike in size (homestuck holds 2,518 items in the window and paranatural 58, over twice as many).

• Must show: A neighbour's request for space and the room yielding: moving the work over, shifting it, shrinking it, letting the neighbour take the spot back, forfeiting an attempt.
• Must not show: Refusing to yield (T3-123); moving after the work was lost to an attack (T3-022); restraint with no request (T3-024).
• Decide when both: Yielding inside a border deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-039 added when the yielding has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-123: Does the room yield the space (T3-039), or refuse (T3-123)?
• Against T3-022: Does the room move because a neighbour asked (T3-039), or because its work was lost (T3-022)?
• Against T3-024: Does the room yield to a request (T3-039), or spare others' work unasked (T3-024)?
• Against T3-012: Does the room give up its own space (T3-039), or grant a neighbour room on its work (T3-012)?
• Against T3-010: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or the room's work moved, shrunk or given up because a neighbour asked (T3-039)?
• Varies: From a sign moved a few pixels left to a whole attempt forfeited to another room.
• Is not: Moving the work after an attack destroyed it (T3-022).
• Exemplars: "we should just move the libra/terezi sign to the left and let university of toronto take it back" (homestuck c0253); "we've successfully moved them from one-over-the-other to a side-by-side" (daftpunk c0045); "I forfeit my attempt at Totoro" (paranatural c0017)

T3-040 apologizing to neighbours for damage

Members apologise to a neighbouring room for damage the room or its members did to its work, often offering to help repair it. Floor: monsterhunter and TheHulk, unlike in size (monsterhunter holds 3,199 items in the window and TheHulk 114, over twice as many).

• Must show: An apology to another room for damage to its work by the room or people from it: 'sorry about that', apologies made in the other room's thread, offers to help redraw or rebuild.
• Must not show: Owning a mistake inside the room's own or an ally's work (T3-170); mourning art the room covered with no apology to its owners (T3-183).
• Decide when both: Apology inside a deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-040 added when the apology has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-170: Is damage to a neighbour's work apologised for (T3-040), or a friendly mistake inside the room's own or allied work owned (T3-170)?
• Against T3-183: Is the apology made to the neighbour (T3-040), or the covered art mourned among members (T3-183)?
• Against T3-076: Is the damage apologised for (T3-040), or the attackers stopped (T3-076)?
• Against T3-047: Is damage to a neighbour's work apologised for (T3-040), or a quarrel between the subs closed (T3-047)?
• Against T3-119: Do the former attackers only apologise (T3-040), or help repair (T3-119)?
• Against T3-010: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or damage the room did to a neighbour's work apologised for (T3-040)?
• Varies: From a one-line 'I'm so sorry' to offers to redraw the character nearby; apologies made on behalf of a nation's members.
• Is not: A member admitting a misclick in the room's own work (T3-170).
• Exemplars: "Sorry about that, if you have the reference pixel art, some of us might be able to help you draw it nearby" (sakuragakuin c0047); "We're as sorry as Canadians that we forced you to relocate." (monsterhunter c0189); "I wanted to apologize, for what it's worth, for all of the asshole people from our subreddit that attacked you." (TheHulk c0109)

T3-046 arguing whether covering is fair

Members argue whether covering others' work is fair: an open canvas where anything goes, or a wrong done to others' effort. Floor: theblackvoid and placetardis, unlike in size (theblackvoid holds 9,430 items in the window and placetardis 227, over twice as many).

• Must show: Argument over covering others' work as such: 'it's an open canvas', 'that's the whole point', 'they put in passion, respect it', whether a neighbour may use the room's background.
• Must not show: Refusing to cover with no argument (T3-024); pleading to have one's own work spared (T3-139); arguing who had the spot first (T3-045).
• Decide when both: An argument that ends in restraint: T3-046 when the argument leads, T3-024 when the restraint does. Stopping the room's own attack is T3-076; arguing whether such covering is fair is T3-046.
• Against T3-024: Is covering refused (T3-024), or its fairness argued (T3-046)?
• Against T3-076: Is the room's attack stopped (T3-076), or the fairness of covering argued (T3-046)?
• Against T3-139: Does the speaker plead for their own work (T3-139), or argue whether covering is fair (T3-046)?
• Against T3-045: Is who came first argued (T3-045), or whether covering is fair at all (T3-046)?
• Varies: From a Void member calling erasure the point of the experiment to members weighing whether a neighbour may use their blank background.
• Is not: A member pleading that a rival spare their room's logo (T3-139).
• Exemplars: "Lol why did you think it was ruining it - the black void was central to the experiment." (theblackvoid c0801, rivals c1908); "C'è gente che c'ha messo dedizione, passione e creatività. Io questo lo rispetto" (italy c0162); "it seems silly to not let them go into our blank blue background." (placetardis c0028, rivals c0012)

T3-076 reining in the room's attackers

Members tell their own room's attackers to stop: no more attacks, leave the neighbours alone, stop vandalising. Floor: rocketleague and Temple, unlike in size (rocketleague holds 21,124 items in the window and Temple 246, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's own members told to stop attacking or vandalising others' work, or an attack called off after an objection; rules against new wars.
• Must not show: Restraint before any attack (T3-024); pleading with another room's attackers (T3-139); excluding members as a sanction (T3-121); members acting against such a call (T3-102).
• Decide when both: An attack called for and then reined in: T3-006 primary when the attacking leads, T3-076 when the reining in does (rule 0 pairs them both ways).
• Against T3-024: Is an attack under way stopped (T3-076), or others' work spared before any attack (T3-024)?
• Against T3-139: Are the room's own attackers stopped (T3-076), or another room's attackers asked to stop (T3-139)?
• Against T3-102: Is the room's call to hold back made (T3-076), or defied (T3-102)?
• Against T3-188: Does the room rein in its own attackers (T3-076), or say the attackers are not its own (T3-188)?
• Against T3-046: Is the attack stopped (T3-076), or the fairness of covering argued (T3-046)?
• Against T3-195: Does the room stop its own attackers (T3-076), or hold another room to an agreement (T3-195)?
• Against T3-006: Is an attack called for (T3-006), or reined in (T3-076)?
• Against T3-007: Is an attack the room started stopped (T3-076), or retaliation for damage it suffered declined (T3-007)?
• Against T3-040: Is the damage apologised for (T3-040), or the attackers stopped (T3-076)?
• Against T3-042: Is the room's own attack on others stopped (T3-076), or upkeep put before expansion (T3-042)?
• Against T3-121: Is the room's attack reined in by words (T3-076), or a member excluded (T3-121)?
• Varies: From one 'stop messing with other schools' to moderators' rules against new wars; attacks withdrawn after an objection.
• Is not: A member asking another room's raiders to stop (T3-139).
• Exemplars: "No, stop messing with other schools" (Temple c0054); "Alot of people from this sub are vandalizing the art on place, this is getting annoying" (rocketleague c0365); "SEGERA HENTIKAN SERANGAN KE INTRODWARF" (indonesia c0130)

T3-102 defying the call for restraint

A member goes on attacking or breaks a treaty after the room told them to hold back. Floor: xcom and cavestory, unlike in size (xcom holds 1,535 items in the window and cavestory 397, over twice as many).

• Must show: A member refusing the room's restraint: attacking after being told no, calling to break the room's treaty, refusing to stop drawing over a neighbour.
• Must not show: The room's call to hold back itself (T3-076); attacks the room calls for (T3-006).
• Decide when both: A call to hold back and its defiance in one theme: the side with more concepts is primary, the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-076: Is the call to hold back made (T3-076), or defied (T3-102)?
• Against T3-006: Is the attack called for by the room (T3-006), or pressed by a member against the room's word (T3-102)?
• Against T3-195: Is a room held to its agreement (T3-195), or does a member break it (T3-102)?
• Varies: From 'Nah I'm going to hit the Bills' to a call to break a treaty.
• Is not: A room calling for an attack on a rival (T3-006).
• Exemplars: "Nah I'm going to hit the bills with green" (nyjets c0164); "we have to break the treaty now" (xcom c0113); "Never shall i stop drawing balrog." (cavestory c0053, rivals c0049)

T3-123 refusing to give up space

Members refuse to give up the room's space when a neighbour asks or presses: 'this is our space', 'we were here first', 'it stays'. Floor: uiuc and tinytardis, unlike in size (uiuc holds 1,862 items in the window and tinytardis 115, over twice as many).

• Must show: A refusal to move or yield ground to a neighbour: claims of first arrival, of a prior agreement or of work done; promises to defend the spot against the one asking.
• Must not show: Yielding (T3-039); arguing who had the spot first with no refusal (T3-045); fighting off an attack with no request to yield (T3-005).
• Decide when both: A refusal inside a border deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-123 added when the refusal has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-039: Does the room yield the space (T3-039), or refuse (T3-123)?
• Against T3-045: Is who came first argued (T3-045), or is the space refused on any ground (T3-123)?
• Against T3-005: Is an attack fought off (T3-005), or a request to yield refused (T3-123)?
• Against T3-124: Is fighting set against moving (T3-124), or is moving refused outright (T3-123)?
• Against T3-059: Is giving up urged (T3-059), or refused (T3-123)?
• Against T3-010: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or a neighbour's demand for the room's space refused (T3-123)?
• Varies: From a polite 'we'd rather stay' to promises to defend the space against a named neighbour.
• Is not: A room moving after a neighbour asks (T3-039).
• Exemplars: "No, this is our space! We will defend it" (uiuc c0123, rivals c0114 c0126); "Yes- we mind. We've been working on protecting that TARDIS and the cube above it for quite a while." (tinytardis c0040); "Actually, we've fought hard for the area and had to negotiate with others when they were taking up part of our space." (qotsa c0029, rivals c0028)

T3-183 mourning art the room covered

Members mourn or regret art that their own room's work covered. Floor: AmericanFlaginPlace and armok, unlike in size (AmericanFlaginPlace holds 4,544 items in the window and armok 74, over twice as many).

• Must show: Grief or regret among members for another's art the room's own work displaced: 'RIP Blonde', a memorial post for a neighbour the room's expansion left no room for, members torn between the two works.
• Must not show: Apologising to the neighbour (T3-040); mourning the room's own lost work (T3-029).
• Decide when both: Mourning and apology together: T3-040 when the apology is addressed to the neighbour, T3-183 when the mourning stays among members.
• Against T3-029: Is the room's own lost work mourned (T3-029), or others' art the room covered (T3-183)?
• Against T3-040: Is the regret addressed to the neighbour as an apology (T3-040), or voiced among members (T3-183)?
• Varies: From a one-line 'RIP' to a member who worked on both the flag and the tree it covered.
• Is not: Members mourning their own room's erased logo (T3-029).
• Exemplars: "Sorry there wasn't room enough for both of us" (armok c0031); "RIP Blonde 😭" (kanye c0443); "PLEASE! I've worked on both the tree and the flag. Please. It's breaking my heart." (AmericanFlaginPlace c0117, rivals c0094)

G14 space and help between rooms

T3-010 settling borders with neighbours

Neighbouring rooms settle lines, overlaps, moves and spots between their works: borders drawn, a shift of a pixel or two, space shared. Floor: anarcho_capitalism and aromantic, unlike in size (anarcho_capitalism holds 2,937 items in the window and aromantic 44, over twice as many).

• Must show: A deal over lines and space between neighbouring works with no fight to end: borders agreed or asked for, shifts of a few pixels, overlaps accepted or refused, space shared.
• Must not show: A pact that ends or forestalls a fight (T3-149); an alliance for joint defence or a joint fight (T3-150); help traded (T3-151); an envoy's errand (T3-194); an agreement already made invoked (T3-195); restraint by the room's own choice (T3-024).
• Decide when both: A pact ending or forestalling a fight between rooms already in contact goes to T3-149; an agreement drawing borders or sharing space where no fight began goes to T3-010. A theme that holds several kinds of deal keeps the leading one as primary.
• Against T3-149: Does the deal end or forestall a fight between rooms in contact (T3-149), or settle lines and space where no fight began (T3-010)?
• Against T3-150: Do the rooms join for defence or a fight (T3-150), or settle where their works meet (T3-010)?
• Against T3-151: Is help given in return for help (T3-151), or a line or space settled (T3-010)?
• Against T3-194: Is a member acting as the room's envoy the doing (T3-194), or the line agreed (T3-010)?
• Against T3-195: Is a line settled now (T3-010), or an agreement already made invoked (T3-195)?
• Against T3-024: Is the line agreed with the neighbour (T3-010), or others' work spared by the room's own choice (T3-024)?
• Against T3-052: Is a neighbour remarked on (T3-052), or a border with it settled (T3-010)?
• Against T3-061: Is the space taken (T3-061), or agreed (T3-010)?
• Against T3-153: Is the theme the place of the talks (T3-153), or the border or space agreed (T3-010)?
• Against T3-168: Is the border agreed (T3-010), or the script changed to keep it (T3-168)?
• Against T3-012: Is a line or shared space agreed between the two rooms (T3-010), or a neighbour simply let onto the room's own work or area (T3-012)?
• Against T3-035: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or space or permission asked of the room that holds it (T3-035)?
• Against T3-039: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or the room's work moved, shrunk or given up because a neighbour asked (T3-039)?
• Against T3-040: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or damage the room did to a neighbour's work apologised for (T3-040)?
• Against T3-084: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or another room asked, as a group, to help with the work (T3-084)?
• Against T3-123: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or a neighbour's demand for the room's space refused (T3-123)?
• Against T3-139: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or another room's attackers asked to stop (T3-139)?
• Varies: From a request to shift a pixel or two to borders drawn with several neighbours at once; overlaps accepted with grumbling.
• Is not: A truce ending raids between two rooms (T3-149).
• Exemplars: "would it be possible to shift right like a pixel or two?" (Temple c0094); "All we're doing is pushing your border back 2 pixels to the left so we can keep our logo intact" (mindcrack c0074); "I don't mind the minecraft people making their shovel overlap the flag" (aromantic c0008)

T3-011 helping another room's work

Members send their pixels to another room's work: helping build, finish or defend it, with nothing asked in return. Floor: stardewvalley and drawhelix, unlike in size (stardewvalley holds 1,541 items in the window and drawhelix 99, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's members helping another room's work, or called to: 'come help the farm at r/X', 'I'm helping r/Y', pixels sent to a neighbour's defence.
• Must not show: Help traded for help (T3-151); asking for help (T3-084); an alliance for joint defence (T3-150); joining another group's build as one's own (T3-137).
• Decide when both: Help given in return is T3-151; help given with nothing asked is T3-011.
• Against T3-151: Is help given in return for help (T3-151), or with nothing asked (T3-011)?
• Against T3-084: Is help asked for (T3-084), or sent (T3-011)?
• Against T3-150: Are the rooms allied for joint defence (T3-150), or is help sent to another's work (T3-011)?
• Against T3-137: Does the member help another's work while keeping the room's own (T3-011), or join another group's build as theirs (T3-137)?
• Against T3-005: Is the room's own work defended (T3-005), or another room's work helped or defended by the room's members, a pledge to protect it included (T3-011)?
• Against T3-056: Is help sent to another's own work (T3-011), or one mark made together (T3-056)?
• Against T3-062: Is help asked for (T3-062), or sent to another room's work (T3-011)?
• Against T3-078: Is help sent to any room's work (T3-011), or to a kin nation's flag as kin (T3-078)?
• Against T3-099: Is the bigger room sending help (T3-011), or the small room relying on it (T3-099)?
• Against T3-119: Is help sent with no prior attack (T3-011), or by those who attacked (T3-119)?
• Against T3-115: Is another room's request refused (T3-115), or its work helped (T3-011)?
• Against T3-195: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or another room's work helped or defended, the pledge named only as the reason for the help (T3-011)?
• Varies: From one member placing for a neighbour to a room sending its spare pixels to a neighbour's defence.
• Is not: Help given in return for help received (T3-151).
• Exemplars: "I'm helping /r/stlouisblues. I wish I could do my party." (borussiadortmund c0027); "come help our farm over at r/farmcarrots/!" (stardewvalley c0003); "Please support their cause by maintaining the borders and defeating the people who keep trolling Helix's eyes" (drawhelix c0006)

T3-012 granting a neighbour room

The room grants a neighbour space on or beside its work: permission to build in its area, room made in its design. Floor: greenlattice and Goodboye, unlike in size (greenlattice holds 5,244 items in the window and Goodboye 248, over twice as many).

• Must show: A neighbour allowed onto the room's work or area: 'go for it', 'do what you want with that part', room made inside the design for another's art.
• Must not show: The room yielding its own space and moving (T3-039); a host ruling on many requests by its rules (T3-162).
• Decide when both: A grant inside a border deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-012 added when the grant has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-039: Does the room move off and give up its spot (T3-039), or let a neighbour build on or beside its work (T3-012)?
• Against T3-162: Does a host rule on requests by its standing rules (T3-162), or does the room grant one neighbour room (T3-012)?
• Against T3-035: Is room asked for (T3-035), or granted (T3-012)?
• Against T3-115: Is another room's request refused (T3-115), or a neighbour granted space on or beside the room's work (T3-012)?
• Against T3-010: Is a line or shared space agreed between the two rooms (T3-010), or a neighbour simply let onto the room's own work or area (T3-012)?
• Varies: From permission for a rival school's logo beside the room's to orange space assigned to displaced groups.
• Is not: A room moving its work to give a neighbour its spot (T3-039).
• Exemplars: "Better FSU than USF, I say. Go for it." (ucf c0091); "Ok. Do what you want with the butthole. Just don't let them vandalise anything else" (Goodboye c0064); "Thank you r/greenlattice for allowing us to put our goof/gaff on your part of the map." (greenlattice c0781)

T3-035 asking a host for space

Members ask a room that holds space (a host, a faction, a neighbour) for room to build. Floor: ainbowroad and rpi, unlike in size (ainbowroad holds 9,887 items in the window and rpi 491, over twice as many).

• Must show: A request for space or permission addressed to the room that holds it: 'permission to make X in your lot', 'can we share and let us slip into that space'.
• Must not show: Choosing open space (T3-020); asking for help with the work (T3-084); pleading with attackers (T3-139).
• Decide when both: A request inside a border deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-035 added when the request has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-020: Is space found on the open canvas (T3-020), or asked of the room that holds it (T3-035)?
• Against T3-084: Is space asked for (T3-035), or hands to help the work (T3-084)?
• Against T3-139: Is space asked for (T3-035), or an attack asked to stop (T3-139)?
• Against T3-012: Is room asked (T3-035), or granted (T3-012)?
• Against T3-036: Is space asked of a host room (T3-035), or is the canvas judged full (T3-036)?
• Against T3-094: Is space asked for (T3-035), or the right to approve it disputed (T3-094)?
• Against T3-010: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or space or permission asked of the room that holds it (T3-035)?
• Varies: From a one-line request in a faction's thread to delegations asking for a fixed square in a colour corner.
• Is not: Asking another room to send hands to help build (T3-084).
• Exemplars: "Permission to make JOHN CENA in your lot." (greenlattice c0947, rivals c0931 c0711 c0677); "get permission to build Aang somewhere on the road?" (ainbowroad c1385, rivals c1563 c1661); "why not share and let us slip into that space?" (rpi c0053)

T3-045 arguing who was there first

Members argue which room was at a spot first, with claims, timestamps and accusations of stealing. Floor: stlouis and bahrain, unlike in size (stlouis holds 1,647 items in the window and bahrain 132, over twice as many).

• Must show: Priority of place argued: 'we were there first', 'did you steal this spot', timestamped proof, a work built around whoever came first.
• Must not show: Refusing to give up space on other grounds (T3-123); arguing whether covering is fair at all (T3-046); disputing who may approve a spot (T3-094).
• Decide when both: First arrival claimed while refusing to move: T3-123 when the refusal leads, T3-045 when the argument over priority does.
• Against T3-123: Is the space refused (T3-123), or is who came first argued (T3-045)?
• Against T3-046: Is whether covering is fair argued (T3-046), or who came first (T3-045)?
• Against T3-094: Is the right to approve a spot disputed (T3-094), or who came first (T3-045)?
• Against T3-087: Is who altered the work traced (T3-087), or who was at the spot first argued (T3-045)?
• Varies: From 'the blue note was definitely first' to timestamped images offered as proof.
• Is not: A room refusing to move because of work done or an agreement (T3-123).
• Exemplars: "The blue note was definitely first. Fill it in guys." (stlouis c0026); "we were there way before anyone of your guys." (sadboys c0054); "Did you just steal this spot from Qatar?" (bahrain c0041)

T3-071 letting neighbours adopt the work

A room lets a neighbour take its work into theirs, and thanks them for keeping it. Floor: undertale and nuclearthrone, unlike in size (undertale holds 2,501 items in the window and nuclearthrone 380, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's work adopted into a neighbour's: thanks for keeping and incorporating it, a neighbour's offer to incorporate a figure into its flag.
• Must not show: A room adopting another's sign as its own (T3-175, the receiving side); converting by force (T3-068).
• Decide when both: An adoption traded for help: T3-151 when the trade leads, T3-071 when the adoption does.
• Against T3-175: Is the room's work adopted by a neighbour (T3-071), or another's sign adopted by the room (T3-175)?
• Against T3-068: Is the work taken in with consent (T3-071), or converted by placing over it (T3-068)?
• Against T3-151: Is help traded (T3-151), or the room's work adopted into a neighbour's (T3-071)?
• Varies: From thanks for a figure kept inside a flag to an offer to incorporate a figure in exchange for help.
• Is not: Taking a neighbour's sign as the room's mascot (T3-175).
• Exemplars: "Thanks r/Ireland for keeping our temmie, and even incorporating it!" (undertale c0235); "We at /r/ireland will incorporate him into the flag if you help us with upwards expansion." (nuclearthrone c0037)

T3-084 asking other rooms for help

A room asks another canvas room, as a group, to help with its work: to build, defend or repair it. Floor: anime and mariokart, unlike in size (anime holds 35,920 items in the window and mariokart 65, over twice as many).

• Must show: A request from one room to another for help with the work: 'we could use your help', 'help us please', calls for reinforcements addressed to another room.
• Must not show: Carrying a call for hands into other subs' membership (T3-062); asking for space (T3-035); help asked in return for help given (T3-151).
• Decide when both: A request inside a deal: T3-010 primary when the deal leads, T3-084 added when the request has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-062: Is another sub's membership asked for hands (T3-062), or another canvas room asked as a group (T3-084)?
• Against T3-035: Is help with the work asked (T3-084), or space (T3-035)?
• Against T3-151: Is help asked in return for help (T3-151), or asked outright (T3-084)?
• Against T3-011: Is help asked for (T3-084), or sent (T3-011)?
• Against T3-002: Are the room's own members called to place (T3-002), or another canvas room asked, as a group, for help (T3-084)?
• Against T3-115: Is help asked (T3-084), or a request refused (T3-115)?
• Against T3-010: Is a line or space settled between neighbours (T3-010), or another room asked, as a group, to help with the work (T3-084)?
• Varies: From a tiny sub asking a big one for help to flag rooms petitioning a road for backup.
• Is not: Posting a call for hands in a kindred sub (T3-062).
• Exemplars: "we're a tiny subreddit, and we could use your help." (anime c0166); "We are the Italy Flag from r/Italy, help us please!" (ainbowroad c0911); "Guys! We need your help over at /r/Place. Pixel Mario Kart needs reinforcements!" (mariokart c0012)

T3-094 disputing who approves a spot

Members dispute whether a room needs another's approval to build, and who may give it. Floor: warframe and gameboy, unlike in size (warframe holds 9,718 items in the window and gameboy 614, over twice as many).

• Must show: Contest over approval for a spot: 'you are not even approved', 'we shouldn't need permission on an open canvas', warnings that a faction covers unapproved art, claims of approval.
• Must not show: Asking for space (T3-035); a host ruling on requests (T3-162); who had the spot first (T3-045).
• Decide when both: A host's ruling that is contested: T3-162 for the ruling, T3-094 for the contest when it has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-162: Does the host rule on requests (T3-162), or is the need for its approval disputed (T3-094)?
• Against T3-035: Is space asked for (T3-035), or the right to approve it disputed (T3-094)?
• Against T3-045: Is who came first argued (T3-045), or who may approve (T3-094)?
• Against T3-126: Is it disputed who speaks for a room (T3-126), or who may approve a spot (T3-094)?
• Varies: From 'we shouldn't need permission on an open canvas' to warnings that a faction covers art it has not approved.
• Is not: A faction ruling on a request to build in its space (T3-162).
• Exemplars: "We shouldn't need permission to draw what we want on a open canvas." (adventuretime c0101); "You guys are not even approved" (seahawks c0132); "The green lattice guys actively cover stuff up unless you get your art approved by them." (gameboy c0010)

T3-099 relying on a bigger neighbour

A small room relies on a bigger neighbour to protect its work, or seeks such protection. Floor: vietnam and bretagne, unlike in size (vietnam holds 374 items in the window and bretagne 38, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room counting on, seeking or being promised a larger room's protection: listed among a big flag's protected works, allied with a bigger room for a secure spot.
• Must not show: An alliance between rooms of like size for joint defence (T3-150); help bartered (T3-151).
• Decide when both: Protection given by the bigger room, told from its side, is not here: it sits with the help it is (T3-011) or the alliance (T3-150).
• Against T3-150: Do rooms of like size join for defence (T3-150), or does a small room rely on a bigger one (T3-099)?
• Against T3-151: Is protection repaid with help (T3-151), or relied on (T3-099)?
• Against T3-011: Is the bigger room sending help (T3-011), or the small room relying on it (T3-099)?
• Varies: From a Breton flag on France's list of protected flags to a small room asking a big one for a secure spot.
• Is not: Two rooms of like size agreeing to defend each other (T3-150).
• Exemplars: "On va le protéger, il est sur la liste des drapeaux autorisés sur le fond France." (bretagne c0016); "France is protecting us from the void" (vinesauce c0025); "Maybe asking and allies with /r/osugame :)" (vietnam c0009)

T3-115 turning away another room's request

Members refuse another room's request for help, space or a cause. Floor: anime and geometrydash, unlike in size (anime holds 35,920 items in the window and geometrydash 452, over twice as many).

• Must show: A request from another room or its members refused or sent back: 'no', 'we can not offer our assistance', 'post it on your own sub', a refusal on grounds of rivalry.
• Must not show: Requests granted (T3-012, T3-011); a host ruling on requests to build by its rules (T3-162).
• Decide when both: A request refused and then helped: the side with more concepts is primary.
• Against T3-162: Does a host rule on requests to build in its space by its rules (T3-162), or does a room refuse another's request for help or a cause (T3-115)?
• Against T3-084: Is help asked (T3-084), or a request refused (T3-115)?
• Against T3-138: Is a side refused to stay neutral between two rooms (T3-138), or one request refused (T3-115)?
• Against T3-011: Is another room's request refused (T3-115), or its work helped (T3-011)?
• Against T3-012: Is another room's request refused (T3-115), or a neighbour granted space on or beside the room's work (T3-012)?
• Varies: From a joke refusal over a capital letter to scorn for a colour; requests sent back to their own sub.
• Is not: A faction denying a request to build inside its space under its rules (T3-162).
• Exemplars: "You capitalized the G in georgia so unfortunately we can not offer our assistance at this time, best of luck in your endeavors." (gatech c0043); "As if I helped a filthy purple. Maybe if they changed the color." (anime c0004, rivals c0123); ">unturned post it on /r/unturned" (geometrydash c0077)

T3-137 joining an outside group's build

Members put their pixels into another group's build as their own effort: joining the Void, following another sub's plan, all pixels to another room's territory. Floor: catholicism and Jamaica, unlike in size (catholicism holds 4,836 items in the window and Jamaica 84, over twice as many).

• Must show: A member, or the room, joining another group's work as a participant: 'I joined the void', 'all my pixels go to r/X's territory', following an outside sub's plan.
• Must not show: Help sent while the room keeps its own work (T3-011); another's sign adopted as the room's (T3-175).
• Decide when both: Joining and helping in one theme: T3-137 when the member's effort moves to the other build, T3-011 when it stays the room's.
• Against T3-011: Does the member help another's work while keeping the room's own (T3-011), or join the other build as theirs (T3-137)?
• Against T3-175: Does the room take another's sign as its own (T3-175), or put its pixels into another group's build (T3-137)?
• Against T3-062: Are other subs' members recruited to the room (T3-062), or does the room's member join another's build (T3-137)?
• Varies: From one member's pixels given wholly to another room's territory to a room following an outside sub's design.
• Is not: Sending a few pixels to help a neighbour while building one's own (T3-011).
• Exemplars: "All my pixels are dedicated to the upkeep of r/PrequelMemes territory, sorry cives." (latin c0009); "I joined the void but I'm tired of the whole thing now" (Jamaica c0005); "PSA. This design was started by r/CKcrusaders. Please follow the plan." (catholicism c0040)

T3-162 vetting others' requests to build

A host room rules on others' requests to build in its space: approvals, denials, conditions, published rules. Floor: thebluecorner and orderofthebluecorner, unlike in size (thebluecorner holds 5,939 items in the window and orderofthebluecorner 69, over twice as many).

• Must show: A room that holds space deciding on requests: 'you can build it, but it has to be completely blue', 'denied', rules for which art stays, lists of approved art.
• Must not show: A single grant to one neighbour (T3-012); disputing the need for approval (T3-094); refusing a request for help (T3-115).
• Decide when both: A ruling that is contested: T3-162 for the ruling, T3-094 for the contest.
• Against T3-012: Is one neighbour granted room (T3-012), or many requests ruled on by the host's rules (T3-162)?
• Against T3-094: Does the host rule (T3-162), or is the need for its approval disputed (T3-094)?
• Against T3-115: Does a host rule on building in its space (T3-162), or does a room refuse a request for help (T3-115)?
• Varies: From one denial to published rules, approval documents and submissions closed.
• Is not: A room letting one neighbour build beside its work (T3-012).
• Exemplars: "You can build it, but it has to be completely blue." (orderofthebluecorner c0047, rivals c0052 c0064); "No new art in the lattice. Denied." (greenlattice c0292, rivals c1047); "Yes! It will go well with blue of his overalls too!" (thebluecorner c0338)

G15 pacts and envoys between rooms

T3-030 disputing how an alliance went

Members dispute an alliance's conduct or worth, often after the close: who kept their word, betrayal, never again. Floor: edmontonoilers and GreenCorner, unlike in size (edmontonoilers holds 2,350 items in the window and GreenCorner 243, over twice as many).

• Must show: Argument over an alliance's or deal's conduct or worth: broken word alleged, betrayal warned of, collaboration renounced.
• Must not show: Holding a room to its agreement so the work can go on (T3-195); arguing whether cooperation is surrender (T3-193); blaming an attacker for a loss (T3-058).
• Decide when both: A breach named mid-work: T3-195; the alliance judged as a whole: T3-030.
• Against T3-195: Is the agreement invoked so the work goes on (T3-195), or the alliance's conduct or worth disputed (T3-030)?
• Against T3-193: Is cooperation as such called surrender (T3-193), or one alliance's conduct disputed (T3-030)?
• Against T3-058: Is a rival blamed for a loss (T3-058), or an ally's conduct disputed (T3-030)?
• Varies: From 'that's the last time we collaborate with them' to warnings that a colour faction will betray its partner again.
• Is not: Reminding a neighbour mid-work of the border agreed (T3-195).
• Exemplars: "FUCK THE FLAMES that's the last time we collaborate with them" (edmontonoilers c0132, rivals c0142 c0136); "Red will turn on you again. You have been warned." (GreenCorner c0092, rivals c0088); "Your representatives haven't been faithful to their word, but hey, typical French." (spain c0061)

T3-047 making up with another sub

Two subs settle a quarrel: apologies, thanks and good wishes exchanged. Floor: canucks and japan, unlike in size (canucks holds 4,507 items in the window and japan 1,332, over twice as many).

• Must show: A quarrel between two subs closed by apology and acceptance, thanks or good wishes.
• Must not show: An apology for damage to a neighbour's work with repair offered (T3-040); a truce ending a fight on the canvas (T3-149).
• Decide when both: An apology for canvas damage that also closes a quarrel: T3-040 when the damage is the point, T3-047 when the quarrel is.
• Against T3-040: Is damage to a neighbour's work apologised for (T3-040), or a quarrel between the subs closed (T3-047)?
• Against T3-149: Is a fight on the canvas ended by truce (T3-149), or a quarrel made up (T3-047)?
• Against T3-122: Are greetings sent with no quarrel behind them (T3-122), or a quarrel made up (T3-047)?
• Against T3-119: Is a quarrel made up in words (T3-047), or damage repaired by its makers (T3-119)?
• Varies: From 'sorry, we were a bit salty, good luck' to an attack claim turned into apology and help.
• Is not: Apologising for covering a neighbour's art and offering to redraw it (T3-040).
• Exemplars: "ah yeah mate sorry about that - we were a bit salty. good luck with your project" (worldpowers c0038, rivals c0039); "Forgive me if I was mistaken." (japan c0085); "it seems you're being pretty polite. So I'd like to apologize." (canucks c0172)

T3-083 negotiating across a language gap

Members deal with another room across a language gap: translating, machine translation, too little of the language to negotiate. Floor: lithuania and RelientK, unlike in size (lithuania holds 183 items in the window and RelientK 40, over twice as many).

• Must show: Language as a problem in dealings between rooms: offers to translate, posts machine-translated, members unable to negotiate for lack of the language.
• Must not show: Writing in the room's own language to hide the plan (T3-116).
• Decide when both: A deal made across a language gap: the deal's kind is primary, T3-083 added when the gap has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-116: Is language used to keep rivals out (T3-116), or a gap bridged to deal with another room (T3-083)?
• Against T3-194: Is a member the room's envoy (T3-194), or is the language between rooms the problem met (T3-083)?
• Varies: From one Google-translated reply to a member offering to translate for all non-Spanish helpers.
• Is not: Writing in Hindi so that rivals cannot read the plan (T3-116).
• Exemplars: "That's fine I just used google translate so hopefully them get it haha." (RelientK c0013, rivals c0012); "to translate anything for you" (epublica c0026); "Google translate:" (lithuania c0032)

T3-119 turning attackers into helpers

A room that attacked a work, or members of it, turn to help repair it. Floor: foxes and TheHulk, unlike in size (foxes holds 314 items in the window and TheHulk 114, over twice as many).

• Must show: Former attackers helping the work they damaged: admitting the damage and helping rebuild, repairing a work they overwrote, a takeover followed by help to rebuild elsewhere.
• Must not show: An apology with an offer of help not yet acted on (T3-040); help with no prior attack (T3-011).
• Decide when both: Apology and repair together: T3-119 when the former attackers act, T3-040 when they only apologise.
• Against T3-040: Do the former attackers only apologise (T3-040), or help repair (T3-119)?
• Against T3-011: Is help sent with no prior attack (T3-011), or by those who attacked (T3-119)?
• Against T3-047: Is a quarrel made up in words (T3-047), or damage repaired by its makers (T3-119)?
• Varies: From one member who destroyed a figure helping bring it back to a room that took a spot by force and helped rebuild the work elsewhere.
• Is not: An apology for damage with a promise to help later (T3-040).
• Exemplars: "I'm one of the assholes who destroyed it and I feel like shit now but I'm helping to get it back." (TheHulk c0062); "we took it by force and then helped them to rebuild it in a new position" (Summit1G c0045); "we decided that building our logo and rebuilding yours elsewhere was dumb." (foxes c0040, rivals c0063)

T3-122 sending greetings to another room

Members send greetings, compliments and thanks to another room with no deal attached. Floor: germany and iastate, unlike in size (germany holds 1,637 items in the window and iastate 173, over twice as many).

• Must show: Greetings, compliments, love or thanks addressed to another room or its work, from or to neighbours.
• Must not show: Thanking allies and telling the alliance's story after the close (T3-072); an envoy's errand (T3-194); a quarrel made up (T3-047).
• Decide when both: Greetings that open a deal: the deal's kind is primary, T3-122 added when the greeting has a concept of its own.
• Against T3-072: Are allies thanked for help in the work, often after the close (T3-072), or greetings sent with no deal (T3-122)?
• Against T3-194: Is the visitor on an errand for their room (T3-194), or sending greetings (T3-122)?
• Against T3-047: Is a quarrel made up (T3-047), or are greetings sent with none behind them (T3-122)?
• Against T3-052: Do members remark on neighbouring pictures among themselves (T3-052), or send a message to another room (T3-122)?
• Against T3-155: Are greetings sent with no fight behind them (T3-122), or a rival saluted after one (T3-155)?
• Against T3-158: Is a greeting sent (T3-122), or a tie beyond the canvas proposed (T3-158)?
• Varies: From humble greetings from another nation's sub to love for a neighbour's sprites.
• Is not: Thanking allies for help in the war after the close (T3-072).
• Exemplars: "[/r/place] Humble greetings from /r/argentina!" (germany c0080); "yeah, sending love from /r/coldplay, I really loved your sprites /r/MadokaMagica <3" (madokamagica c0096); "GT student here, glad to be a neighbor with y'all" (iastate c0057)

T3-138 staying neutral between two rooms

A room keeps out of a fight between others or declares neutrality, or a member is torn between two rooms. Floor: gatech and epublica, unlike in size (gatech holds 919 items in the window and epublica 149, over twice as many).

• Must show: Neutrality: refusing to take sides, a declared neutral zone, a sub stating it neither supports nor attacks a project, members torn between two rooms they belong to.
• Must not show: Refusing a request for help on its own merits (T3-115); making peace with one's own rival (T3-149).
• Decide when both: Neutrality declared while making a truce with one side: T3-149 for the truce, T3-138 for the stance between others.
• Against T3-115: Is a request refused on its own merits (T3-115), or a side refused to stay neutral (T3-138)?
• Against T3-149: Does the room make peace with its own rival (T3-149), or keep out of others' fight (T3-138)?
• Against T3-150: Does the room join a side (T3-150), or stay out (T3-138)?
• Against T3-161: Does the member keep out of others' fight (T3-138), or help them reach terms (T3-161)?
• Varies: From a neutrality zone named for Switzerland to a fan of two rooms caught between them.
• Is not: Turning down a request for help on its own merits (T3-115).
• Exemplars: "MONA LISA ACCEPT OUR NEUTRALITY" (SwissNeutralityZone c0034, rivals c0114); "I also don't want to side against the void because that is nothing short of declaring war" (gatech c0042); "este otro proyecto no es apoyado ni atacado por la administración del sub" (epublica c0066)

T3-149 agreeing truces with rival rooms

Rooms already in contact end or forestall a fight with a truce: peace asked for, offered, agreed, honoured. Floor: ice_poseidon and landry, unlike in size (ice_poseidon holds 8,175 items in the window and landry 24, over twice as many).

• Must show: A pact to stop or avoid attacks between rooms already in contact: peace or a truce asked for, offered, agreed or celebrated; non-aggression pacts.
• Must not show: Lines and space settled where no fight began (T3-010); an alliance for joint defence or a joint fight (T3-150); a truce already made invoked against a breach (T3-195).
• Decide when both: A pact ending or forestalling a fight between rooms already in contact goes to T3-149; an agreement drawing borders or sharing space where no fight began goes to T3-010. A truce invoked against a breach is T3-195 when the invoking leads.
• Against T3-010: Does the pact end or forestall a fight (T3-149), or settle lines where no fight began (T3-010)?
• Against T3-150: Do the rooms stop fighting each other (T3-149), or join to fight or defend together (T3-150)?
• Against T3-195: Is a truce made now (T3-149), or one already made invoked (T3-195)?
• Against T3-138: Does the room make peace with its own rival (T3-149), or keep out of a fight between others (T3-138)?
• Against T3-151: Is a fight ended or forestalled by a pact (T3-149), or help given in return for help (T3-151)?
• Against T3-025: Is a fight ended (T3-149), or two rival marks set together with no fight (T3-025)?
• Against T3-047: Is a fight on the canvas ended by truce (T3-149), or a quarrel made up (T3-047)?
• Against T3-193: Is a truce made (T3-149), or is cooperation argued as surrender (T3-193)?
• Against T3-194: Does a member act for the room toward another room as envoy or representative (T3-194), or is the truce itself asked for, offered or agreed (T3-149)?
• Varies: From a quick 'can we have peace here?' between rival universities to non-aggression pacts with the Void.
• Is not: A border drawn between neighbours who never fought (T3-010).
• Exemplars: "We're all on the same team here. Just request a truce." (ice_poseidon c0207); "The rivalry was fun, but I'm glad we had a truce in the end" (uofm c0206, rivals c0143); "A message of peace" (finland c0008)

T3-150 forming alliances between rooms

Rooms join in an alliance for joint defence or a joint fight: alliances named, proposed, joined. Floor: naruto and AprilKnights, unlike in size (naruto holds 3,975 items in the window and AprilKnights 218, over twice as many).

• Must show: An alliance between rooms for defence or a fight: proposals and invitations, named alliances, rooms joining a front, promises to defend each other.
• Must not show: Help traded case by case (T3-151); help sent with nothing asked (T3-011); a small room relying on a bigger one (T3-099); a truce between rivals (T3-149).
• Decide when both: An alliance that trades help: T3-150 when joint defence or a fight is the frame, T3-151 when the swap of help is.
• Against T3-151: Is help swapped case by case (T3-151), or a standing alliance for defence or a fight formed (T3-150)?
• Against T3-149: Do rivals stop fighting (T3-149), or rooms join to fight or defend (T3-150)?
• Against T3-099: Does a small room rely on a bigger one (T3-099), or do rooms ally (T3-150)?
• Against T3-056: Do kindred rooms make one joint mark (T3-056), or ally for defence or a fight (T3-150)?
• Against T3-174: Is loyalty professed to a colour faction (T3-174), or an alliance made between rooms (T3-150)?
• Against T3-011: Are the rooms allied for joint defence (T3-150), or is help sent to another's work (T3-011)?
• Against T3-010: Do the rooms join for defence or a fight (T3-150), or settle where their works meet (T3-010)?
• Against T3-072: Is an alliance formed for the fight (T3-150), or thanked and told afterwards (T3-072)?
• Against T3-079: Is friendship drawn between flags (T3-079), or an alliance for defence formed (T3-150)?
• Against T3-138: Does the room join a side (T3-150), or stay out (T3-138)?
• Against T3-194: Does a member act for the room toward another room as envoy or representative (T3-194), or is the alliance itself proposed, named or joined (T3-150)?
• Against T3-195: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or a new alliance proposed, named or joined (T3-150)?
• Varies: From a two-room defence pact to a United Red Front of many subs.
• Is not: Swapping repairs with a neighbour once (T3-151).
• Exemplars: "I come to propose a preemptive alliance to join forces in cleanup and construction of art" (thebluecorner c0537); "The Pirate-Ninja alliance!" (naruto c0146, rivals c0160); "Join us and together the red shall rein supreme over the tyrannical oppressors!" (AprilKnights c0045)

T3-151 bartering help with neighbours

Rooms trade help: repairs, defence, maintenance or room given in return for the same. Floor: theitalyplace and thepointing, unlike in size (theitalyplace holds 1,302 items in the window and thepointing 67, over twice as many).

• Must show: Help offered or asked in return for help: 'we'll help you move if you maintain ours', 'repay the favour', maintenance traded for room.
• Must not show: Help sent with nothing asked (T3-011); an alliance for joint defence (T3-150); a third room's work offered up in the bargain (T3-067).
• Decide when both: Help given in return is T3-151, help with nothing asked T3-011.
• Against T3-011: Is help given in return (T3-151), or with nothing asked (T3-011)?
• Against T3-150: Is help swapped (T3-151), or a standing alliance formed (T3-150)?
• Against T3-067: Is help traded between two rooms alone (T3-151), or a third room's work offered up (T3-067)?
• Against T3-010: Is help traded (T3-151), or a line settled (T3-010)?
• Against T3-108: Is help traded by hand (T3-151), or one bot target pooled (T3-108)?
• Against T3-149: Is help given in return for help (T3-151), or a fight ended or forestalled by a pact (T3-149)?
• Against T3-071: Is help traded (T3-151), or the room's work adopted into a neighbour's (T3-071)?
• Against T3-084: Is help asked in return for help (T3-151), or asked outright (T3-084)?
• Against T3-099: Is protection repaid with help (T3-151), or relied on (T3-099)?
• Against T3-194: Does a member act for the room toward another room as envoy or representative (T3-194), or is the trade of help itself offered or agreed (T3-151)?
• Against T3-195: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or a new trade of help offered or agreed (T3-151)?
• Varies: From a one-off swap of repairs to running exchanges of maintenance for room.
• Is not: Sending pixels to a neighbour's defence unasked (T3-011).
• Exemplars: "We're willing to help you move if you help maintain ours afterwards." (thepointing c0011); "If you all can help preserve the Koi, we'd repay the favor by helping keep the Italian flag dot-free." (theitalyplace c0133); "Happy to help repair and maintain the yellow background in exchange for being allowed to exist in your realm." (TeamYellowPlace c0051)

T3-161 mediating between other rooms

Rare tier. A member acts as go-between for two other rooms.

• Must show: A member helping two other rooms reach terms: a go-between, attention brought to treaties between them.
• Must not show: Acting for one's own room toward another (T3-194).
• Decide when both: A member who is envoy for one room and go-between for two others: the role toward the two others is T3-161.
• Against T3-194: Does the member act for their own room (T3-194), or between two other rooms (T3-161)?
• Against T3-138: Does the member keep out of others' fight (T3-138), or help them reach terms (T3-161)?
• Varies: One member's account only.
• Is not: A room's own diplomat in another room's thread (T3-194).
• Exemplars: "so I got to be a go between" (skyrim c0165, rivals c0156); "I tried to be a good neighbor, bringing attention to treaties" (skyrim c0156, rivals c0165)

T3-193 arguing whether cooperation is surrender

Members argue whether cooperating with another room, or accepting a treaty, is surrender. Floor: france and eagles, unlike in size (france holds 16,236 items in the window and eagles 2,540, over twice as many).

• Must show: Argument over cooperation as weakness or surrender: refusals to submit, a treaty defended as sensible, cooperation defended as credit to both rooms.
• Must not show: A truce agreed with no such argument (T3-149); an ally's conduct disputed (T3-030).
• Decide when both: A truce argued over: T3-149 when the truce is made, T3-193 when its meaning as surrender is argued.
• Against T3-149: Is a truce made (T3-149), or is cooperation argued as surrender (T3-193)?
• Against T3-030: Is one alliance's conduct disputed (T3-030), or cooperation as such called surrender (T3-193)?
• Against T3-165: Is friendship with a historic national enemy debated (T3-165), or cooperation as such (T3-193)?
• Varies: From a nation's members refusing to submit to hearts and neighbours to a rival fandom's room defending a joint logo.
• Is not: Agreeing a truce with a rival with no argument over it (T3-149).
• Exemplars: "La France ne se soumettra pas !" (france c0179, rivals c0567 c0576 c0568); "Lets not look like dicks by being the ones to not agree to the peace treaty" (eagles c0217); "the logos were a cooperation between both communities" (starcitizen c0388)

T3-194 acting as envoys between rooms

A member acts for a room toward another room: envoy, diplomat, ambassador, representative, a proposal carried between threads. Floor: stardustcrusaders and Summit1G, unlike in size (stardustcrusaders holds 4,002 items in the window and Summit1G 229, over twice as many).

• Must show: A named role or errand between rooms: a member made the room's diplomat, a representative arriving in another room's thread, a council seat, a proposal carried from one room to another.
• Must not show: Members meeting other rooms in chat with no one acting for the room (T3-153); disputing who may speak for a room (T3-126); the deal itself (T3-010, T3-149, T3-150, T3-151).
• Decide when both: The envoy's errand is T3-194, the deal it carries T3-010 or its kin; when both have concepts of their own, the larger is primary.
• Against T3-153: Does a member act for the room toward another (T3-194), or do members meet other rooms in chat (T3-153)?
• Against T3-126: Does a member act as envoy (T3-194), or is the right to speak for the room disputed (T3-126)?
• Against T3-010: Is the errand the doing (T3-194), or the line it settles (T3-010)?
• Against T3-161: Does the member act for their own room (T3-194), or go between two other rooms (T3-161)?
• Against T3-083: Is a member the room's envoy (T3-194), or is the language between rooms the problem met (T3-083)?
• Against T3-122: Is the visitor on an errand for their room (T3-194), or sending greetings (T3-122)?
• Against T3-149: Does a member act for the room toward another room as envoy or representative (T3-194), or is the truce itself asked for, offered or agreed (T3-149)?
• Against T3-150: Does a member act for the room toward another room as envoy or representative (T3-194), or is the alliance itself proposed, named or joined (T3-150)?
• Against T3-151: Does a member act for the room toward another room as envoy or representative (T3-194), or is the trade of help itself offered or agreed (T3-151)?
• Varies: From one representative's arrival in a neighbour's thread to diplomats flaired on a council server across a dozen chats.
• Is not: Members of two rooms chatting in a shared Discord (T3-153).
• Exemplars: "Today, I became a diplomat for the Day Knights." (day9 c0033, rivals c0037); "Whelp, guess I'm officially our diplomat on the r/PlaceWorldCouncil discord" (stardustcrusaders c0044); "/r/BluePatch representative" (Summit1G c0062)

T3-195 holding rooms to their agreements

Members invoke an agreement already made: its terms spread to placers, the room reminded to honour it, a neighbour accused of breach, a lapsed deal restored. Floor: liverpoolfc and sheffield, unlike in size (liverpoolfc holds 8,929 items in the window and sheffield 105, over twice as many).

• Must show: An existing agreement invoked: 'we made an agreement with hearts', 'it was the original deal', 'we agreed you can have the flower, but ...', a broken deal named.
• Must not show: A new deal made (T3-010, T3-149, T3-150, T3-151); an alliance's conduct or worth disputed, often after the close (T3-030); a member breaking the room's agreement (T3-102).
• Decide when both: A theme that makes a deal and later invokes it keeps the larger part as primary and adds the other under rule 0.
• Against T3-010: Is an agreement made (T3-010), or one already made invoked (T3-195)?
• Against T3-149: Is a truce made (T3-149), or invoked against a breach (T3-195)?
• Against T3-030: Is the room held to its agreement so the work can go on (T3-195), or the alliance's conduct or worth disputed (T3-030)?
• Against T3-102: Is the agreement invoked (T3-195), or broken by a member (T3-102)?
• Against T3-188: Is another room held to an agreement (T3-195), or does an organised room say it does not control placers acting in its name (T3-188)?
• Against T3-076: Is another room held to an agreement (T3-195), or does the room stop its own attackers (T3-076)?
• Against T3-150: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or a new alliance proposed, named or joined (T3-150)?
• Against T3-151: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or a new trade of help offered or agreed (T3-151)?
• Against T3-011: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or another room's work helped or defended, the pledge named only as the reason for the help (T3-011)?
• Against T3-005: Is an agreement already made invoked, spread or said to be broken (T3-195), or the room's own work defended, the pledge named only as the reason for the defence (T3-005)?
• Varies: From a quick 'no stop, we made an agreement' to accusations that a neighbour went over the logo after the deal.
• Is not: Agreeing a new border with a neighbour (T3-010).
• Exemplars: "Oi no stop we made an agreement with hearts" (liverpoolfc c0168, rivals c0169); "We agreed that you guys can have the flower there, but please stop removing Apollo's sleeve with your blue border" (sheffield c0038); "I think we should apologize to r/shyvanamains for going over their logo even after we had a deal." (weezer c0038, rivals c0093)

G16 kindred rooms and colour factions

T3-013 gathering kindred rooms together

Kindred rooms (a league's teams, a region's subs, sister fandoms) gather their canvas work in one hub sub or chat. Floor: warriors and sooners, unlike in size (warriors holds 6,401 items in the window and sooners 131, over twice as many).

• Must show: A hub for many kindred rooms used or proposed: 'everyone go to r/CFBplace', a regional place sub for several teams, one chat for a league, members sent to the hub for help.
• Must not show: A separate sub for one room's own work (T3-090); one joint mark made by two rooms (T3-056); calls for hands sent to kindred subs (T3-062).
• Decide when both: A hub that also makes a joint mark: T3-013 for the hub, T3-056 added when the joint mark has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-090: Is the new sub for this room's own work (T3-090), or a hub for many kindred rooms (T3-013)?
• Against T3-056: Do two or more rooms make one mark together (T3-056), or gather their separate works in a hub (T3-013)?
• Against T3-062: Are kindred subs asked for hands for this room (T3-062), or gathered into a common hub (T3-013)?
• Varies: From a college football place sub to a regional hub for a city's teams and a European chat server.
• Is not: A room opening its own canvas sub (T3-090).
• Exemplars: "#EVERYONE GO TO /r/CFBPLACE FOR THIS SORTA STUFF." (sooners c0038); "i asked for help in r/nbaplace" (warriors c0150); "Come discuss it over at /r/716Place" (ubreddit c0045)

T3-019 tallying kindred rooms' works

Members count which kindred rooms (teams, schools, bands) made it onto the canvas and which were lost. Floor: sixers and ucf, unlike in size (sixers holds 1,701 items in the window and ucf 384, over twice as many).

• Must show: An inventory of kindred rooms' marks on the canvas: which teams, schools or subs made it, which were covered, where they are.
• Must not show: Decoding the finished picture in general (T3-018); remarking on the pictures beside the room's own mark (T3-052).
• Decide when both: A tally inside a reading of the final canvas: T3-018 when the whole picture is read, T3-019 when the kindred rooms are counted.
• Against T3-018: Is the whole finished picture decoded (T3-018), or the kindred rooms' marks counted (T3-019)?
• Against T3-052: Are pictures beside the mark remarked on (T3-052), or kindred rooms' marks across the canvas tallied (T3-019)?
• Varies: From a guess that only two NBA teams made it to a list of hockey logos kept or covered.
• Is not: Explaining what each picture on the finished canvas is (T3-018).
• Exemplars: "Nucks made it, Wings recreated a smaller version of theirs." (wildhockey c0214); "I believe that us and the Lakers are the only NBA teams with our logo on there." (sixers c0137); "The bottom left corner seems to have a few" (ucf c0011)

T3-056 making joint marks with others

Two or more rooms make one mark together: a shared design, a combined flag, lettering finished for each other. Floor: h3h3productions and AvoArmy, unlike in size (h3h3productions holds 16,925 items in the window and AvoArmy 604, over twice as many).

• Must show: A mark designed or built jointly by two or more rooms: shared borders made into a design, flags combined, each finishing part of the other's work, a joint emblem.
• Must not show: Help sent to another room's own work (T3-011); a member adding a personal piece to a shared mark (T3-060); national flags joined by a heart (T3-079).
• Decide when both: A joint mark of two national flags joined by a heart: T3-079; any other joint mark: T3-056.
• Against T3-011: Is help sent to another's own work (T3-011), or one mark made together (T3-056)?
• Against T3-079: Are national flags joined with a heart (T3-079), or another joint mark made (T3-056)?
• Against T3-150: Do rooms ally for defence or a fight (T3-150), or make one mark together (T3-056)?
• Against T3-060: Is one mark made jointly by rooms (T3-056), or a personal piece added to it (T3-060)?
• Against T3-013: Do two or more rooms make one mark together (T3-056), or gather their separate works in a hub (T3-013)?
• Against T3-025: Do the rooms make one mark together (T3-056), or keep two rival marks side by side (T3-025)?
• Varies: From a beanie and lettering traded between two fandoms to ANZAC flags built together before the Americans woke.
• Is not: Sending pixels to a neighbour's defence (T3-011).
• Exemplars: "They're finishing our beanie and we're finishing their lettering." (h3h3productions c0133); "a row of heart-faced avocados wherever we meet up, and we maintain a strong border together" (AvoArmy c0053); "We are working together now on making a second flag to the left side." (newzealand c0143, rivals c0167 c0157)

T3-096 hailing the colour corners

Members of other subs cheer the colour corners and factions, or call people to their side. Floor: ice_poseidon and roosterteeth, unlike in size (ice_poseidon holds 8,175 items in the window and roosterteeth 3,628, over twice as many).

• Must show: Outsiders hailing or cheering a colour faction or corner, or calling others to its side, without being its own members.
• Must not show: A faction's own members professing loyalty (T3-174); spreading the colour (T3-171).
• Decide when both: A member of another sub who joins the faction and hails it: T3-163 for the joining, T3-096 for the hailing.
• Against T3-174: Do the faction's own members profess loyalty (T3-174), or do other subs' members cheer it (T3-096)?
• Against T3-171: Is the colour spread on the canvas (T3-171), or cheered in talk (T3-096)?
• Against T3-163: Does a member defect to the faction (T3-163), or only cheer it (T3-096)?
• Varies: From 'all hail blue corner' in a game sub to a streamer's sub calling its army to the purple side.
• Is not: The Blue Corner's own members hailing their empire (T3-174).
• Exemplars: "ALL HAIL BLUE CORNER" (roosterteeth c0018); "ALL HAIL BLUE CORNER!" (minecraft c0033); "Join us in our honorable fight against the blue scum!" (ice_poseidon c0083)

T3-163 defecting from a rival faction

Members announce that they have left a rival faction and joined this one. Floor: ainbowroad and Pigifs, unlike in size (ainbowroad holds 9,887 items in the window and Pigifs 82, over twice as many).

• Must show: Defection or conversion between canvas factions: 'defector from the Blue Corner', 'converting from the Void', joining the lattice's army with a first pixel.
• Must not show: A faction splitting over doctrine (T3-190); outsiders cheering a faction (T3-096).
• Decide when both: A member leaving over doctrine to found or join a splinter: T3-190 when the split is the doing, T3-163 when the member's crossing is.
• Against T3-190: Does a faction split over doctrine (T3-190), or does a member cross from a rival faction (T3-163)?
• Against T3-096: Does a member cross over (T3-163), or only cheer a faction (T3-096)?
• Against T3-174: Is loyalty professed by members (T3-174), or a member's crossing announced (T3-163)?
• Varies: From one defector's title post to convert stories told in a faction's thread.
• Is not: A faction splitting into rival doctrines (T3-190).
• Exemplars: "I'm converting from r/TheBlueCorner" (theblackvoid c1859); "Defector from the Blue Corner" (ainbowroad c0206, rivals c0634); "Defector from The Void" (greenlattice c0575, rivals c0482 c1079)

T3-171 spreading a faction's colour

A colour faction spreads its colour across the canvas: expanding the corner, covering others with its colour, tendrils and cores. Floor: theblackvoid and GreenCorner, unlike in size (theblackvoid holds 9,430 items in the window and GreenCorner 243, over twice as many).

• Must show: A colour, not a picture, spread as the faction's aim: calls to expand the corner, to cover the canvas in the colour, to grow tendrils, the colour treated as territory.
• Must not show: A room's picture extended into a neighbour's space (T3-061); a rival's work defaced (T3-006); loyalty to the faction professed in talk (T3-174).
• Decide when both: Spreading the colour over a rival's work: T3-171 when the colour's spread is the aim, T3-006 or T3-061 when the target is.
• Against T3-061: Is a picture grown into a neighbour's space (T3-061), or a colour spread as the aim (T3-171)?
• Against T3-006: Is a rival's work destroyed (T3-006), or the faction's colour spread over whatever lies in its way (T3-171)?
• Against T3-174: Is the colour spread on the canvas (T3-171), or loyalty to it professed (T3-174)?
• Against T3-041: Is the room's work extended (T3-041), or a colour spread for its own sake (T3-171)?
• Against T3-096: Is the colour spread on the canvas (T3-171), or cheered in talk (T3-096)?
• Varies: From a corner that grows a few rows to a Void meant to consume the whole canvas; red spread as a political colour.
• Is not: A room extending its logo into a neighbour's space (T3-061).
• Exemplars: "We shall spread the purple monarchy all over the canvas and defeat the blue usurpers!" (purplecorner c0006); "TWO TEAMS: ONE TO RID THE VOID OF ALL MATTER, ONE TO EXPAND OUR CANCER TO THE ENTIRE PLACE." (theblackvoid c0382); "Start expanding the green corner!" (GreenCorner c0048)

T3-172 renewing the order's oaths

A canvas-born order lays down or renews its rules, oaths and membership. Floor: PurplePixels and AprilKnights, unlike in size (PurplePixels holds 837 items in the window and AprilKnights 218, over twice as many).

• Must show: An order's or faction's own rules, commandments, oaths or membership rolls set or renewed: commandments for its members, a yearly renewal, officers appointed by the order.
• Must not show: Elections for office (T3-173); one member put in charge of the work (T3-101).
• Decide when both: Officers appointed under the order's rules: T3-172; officers voted in: T3-173.
• Against T3-173: Are offices filled by election (T3-173), or the order's rules and oaths laid down or renewed (T3-172)?
• Against T3-101: Is a leader named for the work (T3-101), or the order's standing rules set (T3-172)?
• Varies: From commandments for a purple faction to an order of knights meeting once a year.
• Is not: A faction voting in a new leader (T3-173).
• Exemplars: "1. Respect thy fellow Purple. 2. Spare the art, for it is beautiful. 3. Consume all blue." (PurplePixels c0140, rivals c0137); "we picked up some new members and we picked up some old members." (AprilKnights c0086, rivals c0096); "Basically we meet up once a year to shitpost with each other." (AprilKnights c0096, rivals c0086)

T3-173 holding elections for office

A canvas-born faction holds elections for its leaders and offices. Floor: GreenCorner and AprilKnights, unlike in form (GreenCorner is a sub made on the canvas for a colour faction, AprilKnights an order carried over from the 2015 Button event).

• Must show: Elections in a faction: a new leader elected, voter registration, a round of elections, objections to holding them.
• Must not show: Votes on the work (T3-066); one member put in charge with no vote (T3-101).
• Decide when both: A leader elected who then puts choices to polls: T3-173 for the election, T3-066 for the polls.
• Against T3-066: Is a choice about the work voted (T3-066), or a person elected to office (T3-173)?
• Against T3-101: Is a leader named with no vote (T3-101), or elected (T3-173)?
• Against T3-172: Are rules and oaths laid down (T3-172), or offices filled by vote (T3-173)?
• Varies: From an election held during an attack to voter registration after the event.
• Is not: A poll on whether to fight, expand or move (T3-066).
• Exemplars: "Election for new leader!" (GreenCorner c0045, rivals c0073); "With the April Fools Event over it is time to begin the election progress." (AprilKnights c0090); "YOUR HAVING FUCKING ELECTIONS WHILE WE'RE GETTING ATTACKED" (GreenCorner c0105)

T3-174 professing loyalty to a colour

A colour faction's members profess loyalty to it: hails, slogans, propaganda, the colour as faith or empire. Floor: theblackvoid and destiny, unlike in size (theblackvoid holds 9,430 items in the window and destiny 1,436, over twice as many).

• Must show: Members of a colour faction professing its cause: 'all hail the Bluempire', 'hail the all-consuming Void', the colour cast as faith, empire or calling, propaganda praised.
• Must not show: Other subs' members cheering the faction (T3-096); spreading the colour on the canvas (T3-171).
• Decide when both: Hails that call members to spread the colour: T3-171 when the spreading is called, T3-174 when loyalty is the point.
• Against T3-096: Do the faction's own members profess loyalty (T3-174), or other subs' members cheer it (T3-096)?
• Against T3-171: Is loyalty professed (T3-174), or the colour spread (T3-171)?
• Against T3-031: Is the joke the faction's colour cult (T3-174), or any running in-joke of the room (T3-031)?
• Against T3-150: Is loyalty professed to a colour faction (T3-174), or an alliance made between rooms (T3-150)?
• Against T3-163: Is loyalty professed by members (T3-174), or a member's crossing announced (T3-163)?
• Varies: From a one-line hail to the Void cast as a calling and a fit; propaganda posters.
• Is not: A game sub hailing the Blue Corner from outside (T3-096).
• Exemplars: "ALL HAIL THE BLUEMPIRE!!" (thebluecorner c0505); "Hail The All Consuming Void!" (theblackvoid c0833, rivals c1664); "10/10 propaganda. would vote for purple again" (destiny c0047)

T3-190 splitting a faction over doctrine

A canvas faction splits over what it stands for: pure colour or art, erasing or cleaning, the void or coexistence. Floor: thebluecorner and PurplePixels, unlike in size (thebluecorner holds 5,939 items in the window and PurplePixels 837, over twice as many).

• Must show: Dispute over a faction's doctrine that divides it: members leaving for a purer version, splinter subs founded, the faction's past and true nature argued.
• Must not show: A member defecting from a rival faction (T3-163); a member quitting under strain (T3-181).
• Decide when both: A member leaving over doctrine: T3-190 when the split in the faction is the doing, T3-163 when the crossing to another faction is.
• Against T3-163: Does a member cross from a rival faction (T3-163), or does the faction split over its doctrine (T3-190)?
• Against T3-181: Does a member quit under strain (T3-181), or over the faction's doctrine (T3-190)?
• Against T3-179: Is a political ideology argued from the canvas (T3-179), or a faction's own canvas doctrine (T3-190)?
• Varies: From one eraser leaving for the black to a colour faction arguing whether it was once the void.
• Is not: A member giving up because the work became stressful (T3-181).
• Exemplars: "Henceforth, going to begin spreading the black, as they are more true to the ideology I was seeking." (EraseThePlace c0154, rivals c0250); "We were once like the void, however we chose to coexist with others later on." (thebluecorner c0707, rivals c0643); "PLACE PURPLE ONLY PURPLE UNLESS IT'S SOME KIND OF BIG FACE" (PurplePixels c0213)

G17 nations and their flags

T3-065 building the homeland's flag

The room makes the flag of its nation, state or region its mark: calling hands to it, building, sizing and fixing it. A flag built in a room named for a land is that land's flag unless its concepts name another. Floor: argentina and DevonUK, unlike in size (argentina holds 10,453 items in the window and DevonUK 26, over twice as many).

• Must show: The flag of the room's own land (a nation, a state, a region or county) built as the room's mark: calls to make it, its proportions, its spot, its repair. Announcements that the flag has begun or is up, and calls for hands to it, go here too.
• Must not show: Calls for hands to any other picture (T3-002); emblems and pictures drawn beside or inside the flag (T3-113); helping another nation's flag (T3-078).
• Decide when both: The flag of the room's land as its mark is T3-065, calls for hands to any other picture T3-002. A flag with emblems drawn into it: T3-065 for the flag, T3-113 when the emblems have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-002: Is the work a flag of the land the room is named for or speaks for, a flag built in r/guatemala being Guatemala's unless its concepts name another (T3-065), or any other picture (T3-002)?
• Against T3-113: Is the flag itself built (T3-065), or emblems drawn beside or inside it (T3-113)?
• Against T3-078: Is the room's own flag built (T3-065), or a kin nation's helped (T3-078)?
• Against T3-145: Is the flag built (T3-065), or national feeling voiced through it (T3-145)?
• Against T3-026: Is the room's mark announced as up (T3-026), or is the work a flag of the land the room is named for or speaks for, announced, called for or built (T3-065)? A flag built in a room named for a land is that land's flag unless its concepts name another.
• Varies: From nation states to the flags of a US state, a French region or an English county; proportions argued; flags rebuilt after attacks.
• Is not: A room adding its nation's emblems inside a flag already built (T3-113).
• Exemplars: "To all Israel in r/place, let's gather up and make a big flag on the canvas and be proud of our-self" (israel c0190); "hagamos la bandera de argentina en un costado" (argentina c0001); "Need help expanding the Devon flag!" (DevonUK c0016)

T3-078 helping kin nations' flags

Members help the flags of kindred nations or regions: Baltic brothers, neighbours, a diaspora's homeland. Floor: europe and Dominican, unlike in size (europe holds 29,726 items in the window and Dominican 96, over twice as many).

• Must show: Help for another nation's or region's flag felt as kin: helping Baltic brothers restore their flags, asking a kin nation's sub for help, defending a brother nation's flag.
• Must not show: Help to any other room's work (T3-011); the room's own flag (T3-065).
• Decide when both: Help to a kin nation traded for help: T3-151 when the trade leads, T3-078 when kinship does.
• Against T3-011: Is help sent to any room's work (T3-011), or to a kin nation's flag as kin (T3-078)?
• Against T3-065: Is the room's own flag built (T3-065), or a kin nation's helped (T3-078)?
• Against T3-079: Is a kin nation's flag helped (T3-078), or two flags joined with a heart (T3-079)?
• Varies: From Lithuanians restoring the Estonian flag instead of making a third of their own to Dominicans asking help for Puerto Rican brothers.
• Is not: A sports sub helping a neighbouring logo (T3-011).
• Exemplars: "Padedam Estam atkurti savo vėliavą, vietoj darę trečią savo!" (lithuania c0114, rivals c0013 c0068); "Care to help out Estonia with their struggles against Tyler1's ugly face?" (latvia c0051); "anyway you can help our PR brothers? fucking NL are taking over their flag" (Dominican c0034)

T3-079 joining flags with a heart

Rooms join their national flags with a heart or another sign of friendship. Floor: romania and FaroeIslands, unlike in size (romania holds 4,754 items in the window and FaroeIslands 112, over twice as many).

• Must show: Hearts or friendship signs made between national flags: proposals, half-and-half hearts, hearts kept for alliances, friendship between nations drawn on the canvas.
• Must not show: Other joint marks (T3-056); debating friendship with a historic enemy (T3-165).
• Decide when both: A heart between historic enemies argued over: T3-165 when the argument leads, T3-079 when the heart is made.
• Against T3-056: Are national flags joined with a heart (T3-079), or another joint mark made (T3-056)?
• Against T3-165: Is the heart made (T3-079), or friendship with a historic enemy argued (T3-165)?
• Against T3-150: Is friendship drawn between flags (T3-079), or an alliance for defence formed (T3-150)?
• Against T3-078: Is a kin nation's flag helped (T3-078), or two flags joined with a heart (T3-079)?
• Varies: From one Faroese-Welsh heart to hearts traded as tokens of alliance among Balkan and Baltic flags.
• Is not: Two fandoms finishing each other's lettering (T3-056).
• Exemplars: "Would you be interested in making a heart between our two countries as a show of friendship?" (FaroeIslands c0045, rivals c0048 c0049); "Hai sa facem inima jumi-juma macar" (romania c0203, rivals c0018); "Can we create a beautiful friendship with Greece and Turkey including Netherlands." (europe c0515)

T3-085 weighing the room against nations

Members weigh the room's art against the nations' flags on the canvas: flags called bland or too big, a nation's size claimed as a right to space. Floor: suomi and metroid, unlike in size (suomi holds 5,336 items in the window and metroid 432, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's mark set against national flags: flags called boring or bland, a portrait called a bigger show of power than a flag, a nation's population claimed as a right to a big flag.
• Must not show: Questioning the room's own presence (T3-098); attacks on flags (T3-006).
• Decide when both: A judgement on flags that leads to attacking them: T3-006 for the attack, T3-085 for the weighing when it has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-098: Is the room's own presence questioned (T3-098), or its art weighed against nations' flags (T3-085)?
• Against T3-006: Are flags attacked (T3-006), or weighed against the room's art (T3-085)?
• Against T3-037: Is the whole canvas judged (T3-037), or nations' flags against the room's art (T3-085)?
• Varies: From 'a flag doesn't need to be that big and is kind of boring' to a billion-person nation's claim to a big flag.
• Is not: A room asking why it has no logo on the canvas (T3-098).
• Exemplars: "Kekkosen muotokuva on paljon isompi vallan ja dominoinnin osoitus kuin joku laimee lippu mitä siel kaikil näyttää olevan" (suomi c0124); "Sure, I actually started first and a flag doesn't need to be that big and is kind of boring." (metroid c0030, rivals c0050); "we have a billion people in our nation... give us the rights to at least have a big flag." (metroid c0050, rivals c0030)

T3-113 drawing national emblems

Members draw their nation's emblems, figures and symbols beside or inside the flag: monuments, animals, the king's name, a coat of arms. Floor: romania and PlaceNL, unlike in size (romania holds 4,754 items in the window and PlaceNL 701, over twice as many).

• Must show: National emblems and pictures added to or beside the flag: figures of the nation's history or folklore, animals, monuments, the monarch's name, a coat of arms, national words.
• Must not show: The flag itself (T3-065); political symbols argued over (T3-080).
• Decide when both: A flag with emblems: see T3-065. A political emblem argued over: T3-080 when the argument leads. Veiled fascist emblems drawn into a national room's work sit here.
• Against T3-065: Is the flag built (T3-065), or the nation's emblems added to it (T3-113)?
• Against T3-080: Is an emblem added (T3-113), or a political symbol argued over (T3-080)?
• Against T3-041: Is a further piece added to any work (T3-041), or a national emblem to the flag (T3-113)?
• Varies: From Dracula on the Romanian flag to the Dutch king's full name beside the coat of arms; cedars, kiwis, roos.
• Is not: Members arguing whether a hammer and sickle belongs on the canvas (T3-080).
• Exemplars: "Avem mult spaţiu gol pe steag. Am putea să mai adăugăm 5-6 lucruri." (romania c0179, rivals c0170); "Petitie om onze koning zijn volledige naam een plek te geven rechts van ons wapen." (PlaceNL c0138); "Hai sa-l desenam pe Dracula pe steag!" (romania c0170, rivals c0179)

T3-145 feeling national through the canvas

Members feel and voice national belonging through the canvas work: pride in the flag, a nation standing together, fighting for it from abroad. Floor: ireland and latvia, unlike in size (ireland holds 12,112 items in the window and latvia 124, over twice as many).

• Must show: National feeling voiced through the work: pride and tears at the flag, the nation said to stand together, members abroad or by marriage fighting for it.
• Must not show: The flag built (T3-065); the finished work celebrated with no national feeling (T3-009); national politics read into the canvas (T3-130).
• Decide when both: A celebration in national terms: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-145 when national belonging is voiced.
• Against T3-009: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or national belonging voiced (T3-145)?
• Against T3-065: Is the flag built (T3-065), or feeling for the nation voiced through it (T3-145)?
• Against T3-130: Is national politics read into the canvas (T3-130), or belonging felt (T3-145)?
• Varies: From a tear in the eye at the Irish flag to a member defending Latvia's flag in honour of a spouse.
• Is not: A team sub celebrating its finished logo (T3-009).
• Exemplars: "Ive a tear in my eye, im so proud" (ireland c0061); "Ég hefði aldrei trúað því að við gætum staðið saman og haldið velli eins og þarna." (iceland c0075); "I may not be Latvian, but my wife is a native and I'm proud to keep up the fight" (latvia c0043)

T3-165 debating friendship with historic enemies

Members argue whether canvas friendship with a historic national enemy means anything, or should exist at all. Floor: korea and palestine, unlike in size (korea holds 2,773 items in the window and palestine 564, over twice as many).

• Must show: Debate over friendship or coexistence on the canvas with a nation the room counts a historic enemy: Greece and Turkey, Korea and Japan, Palestine and Israel.
• Must not show: A heart made with no such argument (T3-079); cooperation argued as surrender in general (T3-193).
• Decide when both: See T3-079.
• Against T3-079: Is the heart made (T3-079), or friendship with a historic enemy argued (T3-165)?
• Against T3-193: Is cooperation as such called surrender (T3-193), or friendship with a historic national enemy debated (T3-165)?
• Against T3-130: Is national politics read into the canvas generally (T3-130), or friendship with one historic enemy debated (T3-165)?
• Against T3-166: Is friendship with one historic enemy debated (T3-165), or the nation's own record (T3-166)?
• Varies: From Greeks thanking Turkey as a good neighbour to Palestinians asking why anyone supported flags side by side with Israel.
• Is not: A heart drawn between two friendly nations (T3-079).
• Exemplars: "I get why we would not want to attack the Israeli flag on a practical level, but why did anyone ever support the notion" (palestine c0059); "it is possible to be pro-Japan and pro-Korea" (korea c0030); "we managed to quickly learn to co-exist" (greece c0144, rivals c0147)

T3-180 disputing national belonging

Members dispute who belongs to the nation or region and who may speak or act for it on the canvas. Floor: korea and palestine, unlike in size (korea holds 2,773 items in the window and palestine 564, over twice as many).

• Must show: Contest over national or regional belonging: who counts as Korean, whether only Arabs may support Arabs, whether a university's attackers count as Texas, whether Quebec's flag is Canada's to overwrite.
• Must not show: Who speaks for a room (T3-126); national politics read into the canvas generally (T3-130).
• Decide when both: A dispute over who speaks for a national room: T3-126 when the room's voice is in question, T3-180 when membership in the nation is.
• Against T3-126: Is it disputed who speaks for the room (T3-126), or who belongs to the nation (T3-180)?
• Against T3-130: Is national politics read into the canvas (T3-130), or belonging to the nation disputed (T3-180)?
• Varies: From K-pop fans called koreaboos to Texans disowning a university's takeover.
• Is not: Members disputing who may speak for a sub (T3-126).
• Exemplars: "I'm not sure whether to find it funny or sad that you think your favorite manufactured kpop idol is part of your heritage." (korea c0160, rivals c0161); "They're not. Are only Arabs allowed to support Arabs?" (palestine c0078); "I'm from Texas and this is just another reason to hate UT" (giantbomb c0180)

G18 politics, history and hate symbols

T3-080 arguing over political symbols

Members argue over a political or religious symbol on the canvas: what it means, whether it belongs, whether to take it down. Floor: mexico and czech, unlike in size (mexico holds 4,564 items in the window and czech 672, over twice as many).

• Must show: A symbol argued over for its politics: the hammer and sickle as a sign of occupation, Deus Vult as an alt-right sign, a religious symbol judged too divisive, MH17 drawn on a flag, partisan marks on a shared flag.
• Must not show: National emblems added with no argument (T3-113); covering hate symbols (T3-146); ideology argued in general from the canvas (T3-179).
• Decide when both: A symbol argued over and then covered: T3-080 when the argument leads, T3-146 when it is a hate symbol and the covering leads.
• Against T3-113: Is a national emblem added (T3-113), or a political symbol's meaning argued (T3-080)?
• Against T3-146: Is a hate symbol covered (T3-146), or a symbol's politics argued (T3-080)?
• Against T3-179: Is one symbol on the canvas argued over (T3-080), or an ideology argued from the canvas as a whole (T3-179)?
• Against T3-130: Is one symbol's meaning argued (T3-080), or national politics read into the canvas at large (T3-130)?
• Against T3-177: Do members call for or draw swastikas and Nazi imagery (T3-177), or argue over what a political symbol means and whether it belongs (T3-080)?
• Varies: From Czechs calling the hammer and sickle a symbol of occupation to a Mexican room keeping religion off its mural.
• Is not: Painting over a swastika (T3-146).
• Exemplars: "The Hammer and Sickle is a symbol of murder, totality and occupation for many Czechs. Let's take it down." (czech c0122); "Det dekker flagget. Det er også symbol for alt-right bevegelsen, som /r/norge bør distansere seg fra." (norge c0210); "Muy polarizante, se sugerio en Discord. Religion solo puede escalar conflictos lamentablemente." (mexico c0197)

T3-081 casting fights as national history

Members cast canvas fights as their nations' historic wars: invasions repeated, old battles and songs replayed, occupation recalled. Floor: theitalyplace and bdsm, unlike in size (theitalyplace holds 1,302 items in the window and bdsm 308, over twice as many).

• Must show: A canvas fight told in the terms of a nation's real history of war or occupation: 'Russia is invading us again', a war song turned on black pixels, a takeover called a blitzkrieg reenactment, Kosovo again.
• Must not show: War language for fights between game fandoms or teams with no national history (T3-050, T3-005); national politics read into the canvas outside a fight (T3-130).
• Decide when both: A fight fought and told as history: T3-005 or T3-006 for the fighting, T3-081 added when the historical framing has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-005: Is the defence told as a fight (T3-005), or cast as a nation's historic war (T3-081)?
• Against T3-050: Are taunts traded as sport (T3-050), or the fight cast in a nation's war history (T3-081)?
• Against T3-130: Is the fight told as historic war (T3-081), or national politics read into the canvas (T3-130)?
• Against T3-135: Is the fight cast as a nation's history (T3-081), or as the fandom's story (T3-135)?
• Against T3-166: Is a canvas fight cast as historic war (T3-081), or the nation's whole record argued (T3-166)?
• Varies: From one line about an invasion again to running war narration with operations and battle names; Kosovo, Stalingrad, the Piave, blitzkrieg.
• Is not: A streamer's fans calling a raid on a rival logo a war: a game-fandom war has no national history.
• Exemplars: "Russia is invading us again!" (ukraine c0031); "Il Piave mormorò "Non passa il pixel nero!"." (theitalyplace c0272); "I'm more impressed with the blitzkrieg reenactment there, taking over the French flag" (bdsm c0002)

T3-086 carrying in the sub's quarrel

A community's own quarrel or rivalry is carried onto the canvas: one faction's slogan pushed over the other's, the rivalry fought in pixels. Floor: cfb and btc, unlike in size (cfb holds 18,716 items in the window and btc 6,327, over twice as many).

• Must show: A dispute or rivalry from the community's own life fought or argued on the canvas: a faction's mark pushed over another's, the rivalry declared to have reached r/place, members arguing whether outsiders will care.
• Must not show: Taunts traded with a rival community (T3-050); ideology argued (T3-179).
• Decide when both: A rivalry carried in and taunted: T3-050 when the taunts lead, T3-086 when the quarrel's marks do.
• Against T3-050: Are taunts traded (T3-050), or the community's own quarrel fought in marks (T3-086)?
• Against T3-179: Is a general ideology argued (T3-179), or the community's own dispute carried onto the canvas (T3-086)?
• Against T3-006: Is a rival's work defaced (T3-006), or the community's own quarrel carried into the marks (T3-086)?
• Varies: From the Bitcoin block-size split to old-school and current RuneScape players and college rivalries.
• Is not: Two sports subs trading taunts (T3-050).
• Exemplars: "Sorry, just pushing over the SegWit Sandcastle to build Fort Unlimited." (btc c0121, rivals c0183); "The rivalry has invaded r/place!" (cfb c0266); "No one outside r/bitcoin and r/btc will know what segwit is, or care even if they googled it." (bitcoin c0157)

T3-130 reading national politics in pixels

Members read their nation's politics into the canvas: referendums, elections, governments, migration, old regimes. Floor: europe and anarchocapitalism, unlike in size (europe holds 29,726 items in the window and anarchocapitalism 28, over twice as many).

• Must show: National politics brought to the canvas work: the pixel fight felt as a referendum campaign, a government disowned, elections and regimes joked about, a national choice of targets.
• Must not show: One political symbol argued over (T3-080); fights cast as historic wars (T3-081).
• Decide when both: A target chosen for national political reasons and converted, as when a national room puts its own flag over another nation's: T3-068 for the converting, T3-130 for the national reason when it has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-080: Is one symbol's meaning argued (T3-080), or national politics read into the canvas (T3-130)?
• Against T3-081: Is the fight cast as historic war (T3-081), or current national politics read into it (T3-130)?
• Against T3-145: Is national belonging felt (T3-145), or national politics argued (T3-130)?
• Against T3-068: Is the converting the doing (T3-068), or the national politics read into the choice of target (T3-130)?
• Against T3-165: Is national politics read into the canvas generally (T3-130), or friendship with one historic enemy debated (T3-165)?
• Against T3-180: Is national politics read into the canvas (T3-130), or belonging to the nation disputed (T3-180)?
• Varies: From Quebec's referendums to a Serbian election silence; a US member disowning the government while defending the flag.
• Is not: Arguing whether the hammer and sickle should be taken down (T3-080).
• Exemplars: "Je sais pas pourquoi mais j'ai été investi là dedans comme si c'était une campagne référendaire." (quebec c0140, rivals c0185); "Just because I was born in the US doesn't mean I agree with or approve of the current administration." (europe c0711); "This started in a small fun game of pixel art but ended being a literal political war." (canada c0286)

T3-142 making ethnic jokes about rivals

Members mock rival nations or peoples with ethnic jokes and slurs during the canvas fights. Floor: eve and loltyler1, unlike in size (eve holds 10,097 items in the window and loltyler1 1,815, over twice as many).

• Must show: Jokes, insults or slurs aimed at a rival people or nation: refugees, 'elf scum', a whole people cursed, national stereotypes used as abuse.
• Must not show: Taunts aimed at a rival community with no ethnic content (T3-050); arguing whether a taunt goes too far (T3-143).
• Decide when both: Taunts with some ethnic jokes: T3-050 when the taunting leads, T3-142 added when the ethnic jokes have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-050: Is the rival a community taunted as such (T3-050), or a people or nation mocked (T3-142)?
• Against T3-143: Is the joke made (T3-142), or argued as going too far (T3-143)?
• Against T3-182: Is bigotry voiced (T3-142), or shut down (T3-182)?
• Varies: From mock fantasy-race insults to visitors called refugees with an ableist slur; a whole people cursed for ruining everything.
• Is not: A sports sub taunting a rival team's fans (T3-050).
• Exemplars: "All these Estonian refugees getting boners because they beat us LUL" (loltyler1 c0191); "Fuck swedes. Always ruining everything." (eve c0256); "Indonesians are elf scum confirmed" (dwarffortress c0112)

T3-146 covering swastikas and hate symbols

Members cover swastikas, Nazi flags and other hate symbols or slurs placed on or near their work, or call others to. Floor: de and calvinandhobbes, unlike in size (de holds 14,899 items in the window and calvinandhobbes 401, over twice as many).

• Must show: Hate symbols or slurs on the canvas covered or reported: swastikas, Nazi flags, Hitler drawings, slur banners; calls for help against them; promises to cover them for others.
• Must not show: Calls to draw swastikas (T3-177); ordinary repair of stray pixels (T3-021).
• Decide when both: Hate symbols and slurs covered are T3-146; obscene drawings and ordinary insults covered are repair (T3-021). A theme that covers swastikas and refuses requests to draw them keeps T3-146 primary, with T3-177 added when the calls have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-177: Are swastikas called for (T3-177), or covered (T3-146)?
• Against T3-021: Is a hate symbol or slur covered (T3-146), or the work repaired of other damage, obscene drawings included (T3-021)?
• Against T3-080: Is a hate symbol covered (T3-146), or a political symbol's meaning argued (T3-080)?
• Against T3-182: Is a hate symbol on the canvas covered (T3-146), or bigoted talk shut down (T3-182)?
• Varies: From one member removing a swastika beside a flag to a leftist room promising to cover swastikas on another nation's flag.
• Is not: Members turning a rival's logo into a swastika (T3-177).
• Exemplars: "Trolls are trying to write swastikas on your flag on /r/places. We at farleftside have got you covered don't worry." (ukraine c0006); "/r/Eagles - We need your help with this Nazi Flag [/r/place]" (calvinandhobbes c0068); "Es gibt buchstäblich dünne Versuche ein Hakenkreuz neben die deutsche Flagge zu basteln" (de c0011, rivals c0459 c0460)

T3-166 arguing the nation's historical record

Rare tier. Members argue whether their nation has always been on the right side of history.

• Must show: Argument over the nation's historical record set off by the canvas: claims of always being right, massacres cited against them.
• Must not show: Fights cast as historic wars (T3-081); friendship with a historic enemy debated (T3-165).
• Decide when both: The record argued while debating a heart with an old enemy: T3-165 when the friendship leads, T3-166 when the record does.
• Against T3-081: Is a canvas fight cast as historic war (T3-081), or the nation's whole record argued (T3-166)?
• Against T3-165: Is friendship with one historic enemy debated (T3-165), or the nation's own record (T3-166)?
• Varies: One room's thread only.
• Is not: Casting a border fight as a repeat of an old war (T3-081).
• Exemplars: "Greeks have always been on the right side of history" (greece c0171, rivals c0184); "Εxcept for the massacres" (greece c0183, rivals c0171); "Nah Greeks were pretty much always on the right side of history" (greece c0184, rivals c0171)

T3-177 calling to draw swastikas

Members call for, or take part in, drawing swastikas and Nazi imagery on the canvas, the room's own logo included. Floor: pcmasterrace and funhaus, unlike in size (pcmasterrace holds 40,459 items in the window and funhaus 2,830, over twice as many).

• Must show: Calls or admissions to draw swastikas or Nazi images: turning a logo into a swastika, helping change a logo into one, proposing Hitler's face.
• Must not show: Covering hate symbols (T3-146); arguing over a political symbol's meaning (T3-080).
• Decide when both: See T3-146.
• Against T3-146: Are swastikas called for or drawn (T3-177), or covered (T3-146)?
• Against T3-192: Is the griefing for fun with no hate symbol (T3-192), or a swastika called for (T3-177)?
• Against T3-006: Is a rival's work defaced (T3-006), or a swastika drawn (T3-177)?
• Against T3-080: Do members call for or draw swastikas and Nazi imagery (T3-177), or argue over what a political symbol means and whether it belongs (T3-080)?
• Varies: From a proposal to turn a rival channel's logo into a swastika to members drawing one on their own room's logo.
• Is not: A room painting over a swastika (T3-146).
• Exemplars: "Let's make the logo on r/place a swastika" (funhaus c0236); "Anyone want to turn the FH logo into an actual swastika?" (roosterteeth c0218); "i was helping changing it to a swastika a few hours ago" (pcmasterrace c0643, rivals c0787)

T3-179 arguing ideology from the canvas

Members argue political ideology from the canvas: socialism, capitalism, anarchism, consensus, read into how the canvas was made. Floor: anarcho_capitalism and anarchocapitalism, unlike in size (anarcho_capitalism holds 2,937 items in the window and anarchocapitalism 28, over twice as many).

• Must show: Ideology argued with the canvas as evidence or occasion: r/place called decentralised socialism, capitalists said to destroy rather than build, left unity questioned, leaderless consensus praised.
• Must not show: One political symbol argued over (T3-080); a faction's own canvas doctrine (T3-190); the fairness of scripts (T3-027).
• Decide when both: A symbol argued in ideological terms: T3-080 when the symbol is the object, T3-179 when the ideology is.
• Against T3-080: Is one symbol on the canvas argued (T3-080), or an ideology argued from the canvas (T3-179)?
• Against T3-190: Is a canvas faction's doctrine split (T3-190), or a political ideology argued (T3-179)?
• Against T3-027: Is the fairness of scripts argued (T3-027), or political ideology (T3-179)?
• Against T3-086: Is a general ideology argued (T3-179), or the community's own dispute carried onto the canvas (T3-086)?
• Varies: From anarcho-capitalists conceding the canvas looks like socialism to leftists arguing Kronstadt.
• Is not: Czechs arguing that the hammer and sickle should come down (T3-080).
• Exemplars: "So r/place is basically decentralize socialism." (anarcho_capitalism c0154); "Yeah but what do you think about Kronstadt" (completeanarchy c0293, rivals c0271); "Typical capitalist, destroys others instead of building your own." (anarchocapitalism c0003)

T3-182 shutting down bigotry in chat

Members or moderators shut down bigoted speech in the room's thread or chat: slurs removed, a speaker shut down, racist claims answered. Floor: Rainbow6 and fullcommunism, unlike in size (Rainbow6 holds 20,801 items in the window and fullcommunism 3,915, over twice as many).

• Must show: Bigotry in the room's talk answered: anti-trans speech shut down in the Discord, a post removed for a slur, racist claims rebutted.
• Must not show: Hate symbols on the canvas covered (T3-146); members excluded for damage to the work (T3-121).
• Decide when both: A member banned for bigoted talk: T3-182 when the bigotry leads, T3-121 when the exclusion does.
• Against T3-146: Is a hate symbol on the canvas covered (T3-146), or bigoted talk shut down (T3-182)?
• Against T3-121: Is a member excluded for damage to the work or room (T3-121), or bigoted speech shut down (T3-182)?
• Against T3-142: Is bigotry voiced (T3-142), or shut down (T3-182)?
• Against T3-063: Posts removed for breaking the sub's rules (T3-063), or members shutting down bigotry in a chat (T3-182)?
• Varies: From a moderator removing a post for a slur to members shutting down an anti-trans speaker in the room's chat.
• Is not: Painting over a swastika on the canvas (T3-146).
• Exemplars: "someone joined the kanye discord and started spouting anti-trans shit. so we shut him down" (kanye c0277); "Your post was removed; it contained a slur." (fullcommunism c0239); "He is an uzbek as he is born in uzbekistan." (Rainbow6 c0403)

G19 taunts and victories over rivals

T3-025 placing rival marks together

Rare tier. A room puts its mark beside a rival's and keeps both standing without a war.

• Must show: The room's mark placed next to a rival community's mark on purpose, both defended together, the rivalry kept on the canvas without attacking.
• Must not show: Taunts traded (T3-050); a truce ending a fight (T3-149); a joint mark (T3-056).
• Decide when both: Rival marks side by side under a defence pact: T3-025 for the pairing, T3-150 for the pact when it has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-056: Do the rooms make one mark together (T3-056), or keep two rival marks side by side (T3-025)?
• Against T3-149: Is a fight ended (T3-149), or two rival marks set together with no fight (T3-025)?
• Against T3-050: Are taunts traded (T3-050), or the rivalry shown by marks placed side by side (T3-025)?
• Varies: One room's case: the Battle of Alberta kept on the canvas without a war.
• Is not: Two fandoms finishing each other's lettering (T3-056).
• Exemplars: "The Flames are a part of r/place we aren't, lets make the Oilers logo next to the Flames" (edmontonoilers c0037, rivals c0077 c0112); "I'm hoping we can both help each other out in defending them." (edmontonoilers c0077, rivals c0037); "Add PINK around both logos for BREAST CANCER awareness!!" (edmontonoilers c0112, rivals c0037)

T3-050 trading taunts with rivals

Members trade taunts, threats and mockery with a rival community over the canvas. Floor: calgaryflames and anarchocapitalism, unlike in size (calgaryflames holds 4,860 items in the window and anarchocapitalism 28, over twice as many).

• Must show: Taunts, threats or mockery aimed at a rival community over the canvas work: 'try your best', 'they will destroy you', jibes at a rival's scripts or logo.
• Must not show: Jokes about a people or nation (T3-142); blame laid for a loss after the close (T3-058); a community's own quarrel carried onto the canvas (T3-086).
• Decide when both: Taunts with ethnic jokes: T3-050 primary when taunting leads, T3-142 added when the ethnic jokes have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-142: Is a rival community taunted (T3-050), or a people or nation mocked (T3-142)?
• Against T3-058: Is a rival taunted as sport (T3-050), or blamed for a loss after the close (T3-058)?
• Against T3-086: Is a rival taunted (T3-050), or the community's own internal quarrel fought (T3-086)?
• Against T3-155: Is the rival mocked (T3-050), or saluted after the fight (T3-155)?
• Against T3-017: Is a rival community taunted (T3-050), or the sub's ordinary talk carried on with no rival in it (T3-017)?
• Against T3-025: Are taunts traded (T3-050), or the rivalry shown by marks placed side by side (T3-025)?
• Against T3-031: Is a rival mocked (T3-050), or the room's own joke played among its members (T3-031)?
• Against T3-081: Are taunts traded as sport (T3-050), or the fight cast in a nation's war history (T3-081)?
• Against T3-134: Are taunts traded in replies (T3-050), or one chant repeated as a flood (T3-134)?
• Against T3-143: Is the taunt made (T3-050), or argued over (T3-143)?
• Against T3-178: Is a rival community taunted (T3-050), or one person harassed (T3-178)?
• Varies: From friendly ribbing between schools to threats that an allied faction will destroy the rival.
• Is not: Mocking a rival nation's people (T3-142).
• Exemplars: "Lol try your best ya wank." (england c0023); "/r/thefarleftside will destroy you." (anarchocapitalism c0004); "But only super mature adults with lots of friends make scripts to cheat a fun community activity." (calgaryflames c0281)

T3-134 flooding rivals' threads with chants

Members flood a rival's thread with a chant or refrain: the Void's creed, a streamer's victory chorus, 'get gooned'. Floor: greenlattice and WPI, unlike in size (greenlattice holds 5,244 items in the window and WPI 108, over twice as many).

• Must show: A chant, refrain or slogan repeated by many members in another room's thread or in their own as a raid or victory chorus.
• Must not show: Taunts traded in ordinary replies (T3-050); the room's own in-jokes played among members (T3-031).
• Decide when both: A chant that is the room's own in-joke posted in a rival's thread: T3-134; posted among its own members: T3-031.
• Against T3-050: Are taunts traded in replies (T3-050), or one chant repeated as a flood (T3-134)?
• Against T3-031: Is the refrain played among the room's members (T3-031), or used to flood a rival's thread (T3-134)?
• Against T3-154: Is victory claimed in words (T3-154), or chanted as a chorus (T3-134)?
• Varies: From the Void's creed posted line after line in Green Lattice's thread to a streamer's fans chanting in chorus after a win.
• Is not: A room's members playing their own catchphrase among themselves (T3-031).
• Exemplars: "I AM ONE WITH THE VOID, THE VOID IS WITH ME" (greenlattice c0873, rivals c0894 c0863); "VI VON ZULUL" (Summit1G c0118, rivals c0137); "GET GOONED" (WPI c0030, rivals c0012 c0014)

T3-135 telling clashes as fandom lore

Members retell the canvas clashes in their fandom's own terms: as the game's battles, the show's factions, the band's season. Floor: skyrim and transformers, unlike in size (skyrim holds 4,956 items in the window and transformers 771, over twice as many).

• Must show: The canvas fight or its damage told in the fandom's own story terms: Autobots and Decepticons, battle scars, a game's release, a fictional war.
• Must not show: Fights cast as a nation's historic wars (T3-081); the room's in-jokes with no canvas clash (T3-031).
• Decide when both: A clash told in fandom terms with jokes: T3-135 when the clash is the subject, T3-031 when the joke is.
• Against T3-081: Is the fight cast as a nation's history (T3-081), or as the fandom's story (T3-135)?
• Against T3-031: Is it the room's running joke (T3-031), or the canvas clash retold in fandom terms (T3-135)?
• Against T3-073: Is the work's history recounted plainly (T3-073), or as fandom lore (T3-135)?
• Varies: From missing pixels called battle scars to a whole retelling as the game's Grand Battle.
• Is not: A Polish room calling a border fight a new partition (T3-081).
• Exemplars: "Those missing pieces are kind of like battle scars :)" (toolband c0211); "Skyrim, upon release, was an unfinished game for most people." (skyrim c0162); "No. Decepticon forever" (transformers c0084)

T3-143 judging whether a joke offends

Members argue whether a taunt or joke about the canvas goes too far: racist, cruel or just a joke. Floor: runescape and romania, unlike in size (runescape holds 15,369 items in the window and romania 4,754, over twice as many).

• Must show: Argument over a joke's or taunt's limits: called racist or horrible, defended as only a joke, 'you can't make a joke without offending someone'.
• Must not show: The taunt or joke itself (T3-050, T3-142); objecting to April Fools posts (T3-032).
• Decide when both: A taunt and the argument over it: T3-050 or T3-142 when the taunting leads, T3-143 when the argument does.
• Against T3-050: Is the taunt made (T3-050), or argued over (T3-143)?
• Against T3-142: Is the ethnic joke made (T3-142), or its limits argued (T3-143)?
• Against T3-032: Are April Fools posts objected to (T3-032), or a canvas joke's limits argued (T3-143)?
• Varies: From a joke about a former president's death called horrible to a flag joke defended against a charge of racism.
• Is not: Members telling the sub to stop its April Fools posts (T3-032).
• Exemplars: "being a dumb racist shitlord is supposed to be funny these days?" (eve c0268, rivals c0269); "Sunt asa oribile glumele astora cu Iliescu." (romania c0047); "Cause you can't make a joke without offending someone now a days." (runescape c0570)

T3-154 claiming victory over rival rooms

Members claim victory over rival rooms: outlasting them, defending against bigger subs, defeating them. Floor: starvstheforcesofevil and DevonUK, unlike in size (starvstheforcesofevil holds 4,950 items in the window and DevonUK 26, over twice as many).

• Must show: Victory claimed against named or implied rivals: a flag that outlasted a rival's, a small sub that held against bigger ones, rivals called defeated.
• Must not show: The finished work celebrated with no rival (T3-009); rivals saluted (T3-155).
• Decide when both: Celebration with a victory claim: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-154 when victory over rivals is.
• Against T3-009: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or victory over rivals claimed (T3-154)?
• Against T3-155: Is victory claimed (T3-154), or the rival saluted (T3-155)?
• Against T3-134: Is victory claimed in words (T3-154), or chanted as a flood (T3-134)?
• Varies: From a county flag outlasting its neighbour's to nationalist boasts of defeating a rival nation.
• Is not: A room celebrating its finished logo with no rival named (T3-009).
• Exemplars: "We did it, the flag lasted until the end and more importantly; lasted longer than Cornish flag" (DevonUK c0020); "Our smalll sub created pixel art and defended it from way bigger subs" (starvstheforcesofevil c0264); "After the Pakis were defeated in the second battle of cuckoldry" (bakchodi c0264)

T3-155 saluting rivals after the fight

Members salute their rivals once the fight is over: well played, good game, thanks for playing. Floor: vegan and loltyler1, unlike in size (vegan holds 7,616 items in the window and loltyler1 1,815, over twice as many).

• Must show: Respect or thanks addressed to a rival after the fight: 'well played', 'GG', 'thanks for playing', a loss conceded with good grace.
• Must not show: Taunts (T3-050); victory claimed (T3-154); greetings with no fight behind them (T3-122).
• Decide when both: Salutes mixed with taunts: the side with more concepts is primary.
• Against T3-050: Is the rival mocked (T3-050), or saluted (T3-155)?
• Against T3-154: Is victory claimed (T3-154), or the rival saluted (T3-155)?
• Against T3-122: Are greetings sent with no fight behind them (T3-122), or a rival saluted after one (T3-155)?
• Varies: From a streamer's fans telling Estonia 'well played' to a member conceding the loss to the vegans.
• Is not: Neighbours greeting each other with no fight between them (T3-122).
• Exemplars: "Well played Estonia, I think you deserve if after seeing these statistics xd" (loltyler1 c0195); "Yeah, Looks like I took the L here. Nice Job Vegans. GG" (vegan c0142); "Thanks for playing guys. /r/Norge send their regards." (texas c0265)

G20 looking at the canvas and its worth

T3-016 explaining what the canvas is

Members ask or explain what the canvas event is, why it is everywhere and how anyone places a pixel. Floor: leafs and baylor, unlike in size (leafs holds 10,209 items in the window and baylor 107, over twice as many).

• Must show: Questions or answers about the event itself: what r/place is, one pixel every few minutes, how to pick a colour and place, why subs are making pictures, the heat map or the rules of the event.
• Must not show: A guide or template for the room's own work (T3-070); calls to come and place (T3-002); what a particular picture means (T3-018); whether the canvas is worth it (T3-037).
• Decide when both: An explanation followed by the room's template: T3-016 when the event is explained to newcomers, T3-070 added when the template or coordinates have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-070: Is the event explained for anyone (T3-016), or a guide, template or coordinates for the room's work posted to follow (T3-070)?
• Against T3-002: Is the event explained (T3-016), or are members called to come and place (T3-002)?
• Against T3-018: Is the event as a whole explained (T3-016), or a particular picture's meaning worked out (T3-018)?
• Against T3-037: Is it said what the canvas is (T3-016), or argued whether it is worth anything (T3-037)?
• Against T3-074: Is the cooldown explained as a rule of the event (T3-016), or worked around by the room (T3-074)?
• Against T3-034: Is the question how and where to place for the room (T3-034), or what r/place is (T3-016)?
• Against T3-095: Is the claim tested whether r/place itself is Reddit's April Fools joke, answered by explaining what r/place is (T3-016), or a claim about anything else (T3-095)?
• Varies: From a bare 'what is r/place?' to a full account of the five-minute rule and subs planning pictures together.
• Is not: A post giving the room's coordinates and colour template (T3-070).
• Exemplars: "It's basically a subreddit where you can place one pixel every five minutes. Lots of subreddits are working together and make plans to get everyone to create a certain image." (leafs c0212); "You have to click a color square at the bottom and then pick a pixel." (virginiatech c0013); "Can I ask wtf is r/place and why is it popular all of a sudden?" (baylor c0012)

T3-018 decoding the finished picture's details

Members work out or explain what a particular picture or detail on the canvas shows, means or refers to. Floor: 2007scape and completeanarchy, unlike in size (2007scape holds 26,282 items in the window and completeanarchy 1,305, over twice as many).

• Must show: A particular image or detail decoded: what a reference means, whose character a figure is, what a colour or added piece says, what an image reads as.
• Must not show: The event as a whole explained (T3-016); neighbouring pictures named or admired with no meaning worked out (T3-052); the work's history told (T3-073).
• Decide when both: A detail decoded inside a celebration: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-018 added when the decoding has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-016: Is a particular picture's meaning worked out (T3-018), or the event as a whole explained (T3-016)?
• Against T3-052: Is a detail's meaning worked out (T3-018), or a neighbouring picture noticed, named or admired (T3-052)?
• Against T3-073: Is what a detail means explained (T3-018), or what happened to the work told (T3-073)?
• Against T3-019: Is the whole finished picture decoded (T3-018), or the kindred rooms' marks counted (T3-019)?
• Varies: From a one-line note that a label is a fraternity joke to an argument over what a parrot's added cap says about its politics.
• Is not: A member listing the subs next to the room's mark (T3-052).
• Exemplars: "A q p w is something you'd type into the game chat one after another. The q p and w line up to make a penis shape." (2007scape c0858); "The broke phi broke fraternity (a reference to late reg.)" (sixers c0129); "but then somebody gave her Bookchin cap that made her overall colour scheme YPG/J-like, so she probably converted into the libertarian municipalism." (completeanarchy c0281)

T3-031 playing the room's in-jokes

Members play the room's own memes, catchphrases and running jokes in the canvas talk. Floor: paragon and Lugarix, unlike in size (paragon holds 7,305 items in the window and Lugarix 4, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's own humour carried into canvas talk: a catchphrase, a running meme, a story riff, wordplay on the fandom, jokes about what the room drew.
• Must not show: April Fools fakes the room stages (T3-001); taunts at rivals (T3-050); one chant flooding a rival's thread (T3-134); clashes retold as fandom lore (T3-135); the finished work celebrated (T3-009); the sub's ordinary talk with no canvas in it (T3-017).
• Decide when both: Celebration full of in-jokes: T3-009 when the finished work is celebrated, T3-031 added when the jokes have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-009: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or the room's joke played (T3-031)?
• Against T3-001: Is a fake staged for April Fools (T3-001), or the room's running joke played (T3-031)?
• Against T3-017: Does the sub's ordinary talk go on with no canvas in it (T3-017), or is the joke played around the canvas work (T3-031)?
• Against T3-050: Is a rival mocked (T3-050), or the room's own joke played among its members (T3-031)?
• Against T3-135: Is a canvas clash retold as fandom story (T3-135), or the room's joke played with no clash told (T3-031)?
• Against T3-053: Is the room's chant played in replies (T3-031), or spelled across the titles of many posts (T3-053)?
• Against T3-064: Is the in-joke played inside the room (T3-031), or taken out to other subs (T3-064)?
• Against T3-134: Is the refrain played among the room's members (T3-031), or used to flood a rival's thread (T3-134)?
• Against T3-156: Does a canvas detail become the room's sign (T3-156), or is the room's existing joke played (T3-031)?
• Against T3-174: Is the joke the faction's colour cult (T3-174), or any running in-joke of the room (T3-031)?
• Against T3-192: Is the joke played by damaging the work (T3-192), or told in talk (T3-031)?
• Varies: From a single catchphrase repeated under a post to a story riff that runs through a whole thread.
• Is not: A thread of 'we did it' posts celebrating the finished logo (T3-009).
• Exemplars: "Now the void seeks to return to the past, and undo the future that is AKU." (samuraijack c0318); "Before Monolith he could tank all five enemies and an inhibitor by himself! Buff Iggy!" (paragon c0082); "Frank Ocean Blonde??? That's independent!" (indieheads c0087)

T3-037 arguing the canvas's worth

Members argue whether the canvas, its fights or the time spent on it are worth anything. Floor: vegan and serbia, unlike in size (vegan holds 7,616 items in the window and serbia 2,621, over twice as many).

• Must show: The canvas weighed as a whole: a waste of time, stupid, pointless; or fun, art, a social experiment worth doing; a bare dismissal of a call to place.
• Must not show: Complaints that canvas posts crowd the sub (T3-075); the room's own showing questioned (T3-098); what working together meant (T3-157).
• Decide when both: A dismissal of the canvas inside a complaint about posts: T3-075 when the posts are the target, T3-037 when the canvas itself is.
• Against T3-075: Is the canvas itself judged worthless or worthwhile (T3-037), or are its posts objected to in the sub (T3-075)?
• Against T3-098: Is the canvas weighed as a whole (T3-037), or the room's showing on it questioned (T3-098)? A bare dismissal of a call, with nothing said about the room's own showing, is T3-037.
• Against T3-157: Is the canvas's worth argued (T3-037), or what working together meant reflected on (T3-157)?
• Against T3-016: Is it argued whether the canvas is worth anything (T3-037), or explained what it is (T3-016)?
• Against T3-027: Is the canvas's worth argued (T3-037), or the fairness of its scripts (T3-027)?
• Against T3-085: Is the whole canvas judged (T3-037), or nations' flags against the room's art (T3-085)?
• Varies: From 'a weird waste of time on nothing' to defending the canvas as an art project and once-a-year fun.
• Is not: A member asking that canvas posts go into one megathread (T3-075).
• Exemplars: "This subreddit is filled with redditards ready to waste a weird amount of time on nothing." (korea c0139); "Graffiti is defacement of someone else's property. You, however, participated in an art project." (vegan c0369); "Ceo Reddit se zajebava jednom u godini, i ti sad ulećeš sa nekim kmečanjem." (serbia c0097)

T3-052 remarking on neighbouring pictures

Members remark among themselves on the pictures beside or around their own mark. Floor: roosterteeth and yumenikki, unlike in size (roosterteeth holds 3,628 items in the window and yumenikki 142, over twice as many).

• Must show: Pictures around the room's mark noticed: neighbours named, asked about, liked or mocked; what appeared next to the mark pointed out.
• Must not show: A message sent to another room (T3-122); a detail's meaning worked out (T3-018); the room's own mark found placed (T3-082); a border settled (T3-010).
• Decide when both: Remarks on neighbours in a celebration: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-052 added when the neighbours have concepts of their own.
• Against T3-122: Do members remark on neighbouring pictures among themselves (T3-052), or send a message to another room (T3-122)?
• Against T3-018: Is a neighbouring picture noticed or named (T3-052), or its meaning worked out (T3-018)?
• Against T3-082: Is another picture remarked on (T3-052), or the room's own mark found already placed (T3-082)?
• Against T3-010: Is a neighbour remarked on (T3-052), or a border with it settled (T3-010)?
• Against T3-019: Are pictures beside the mark remarked on (T3-052), or kindred rooms' marks across the canvas tallied (T3-019)?
• Varies: From a one-line question about the figure next to the room's character to a full map of the neighbours on every side.
• Is not: A room posting a greeting to the sub beside its mark (T3-122).
• Exemplars: "Who's the girl next to Madotsuki at r/place?" (yumenikki c0028); "I was so happy when I saw this next to Rick!" (roosterteeth c0122); "North West: r/uvic & r/simonfraser & r/UBC & r/japan & r/ShawnHate & r/SS13" (zootopia c0180, rivals c0177 c0174 c0179)

T3-057 remaking canvas art elsewhere

Members remake the canvas work or its fights in other media: Minecraft, LEGO, fan art, wallpapers, memes. Floor: minecraft and animalcrossing, unlike in size (minecraft holds 6,314 items in the window and animalcrossing 991, over twice as many).

• Must show: Canvas work or the canvas fight carried into another medium: rebuilt in a game, drawn as fan art, made into wallpapers, memes or copypasta, a design inspired by a canvas picture.
• Must not show: The work kept as it was in screenshots or timelapses (T3-105); the mark adopted as the room's emblem (T3-156); the work carried to a successor canvas (T3-054).
• Decide when both: A remake shared as a keepsake: T3-057 when the new medium is the point, T3-105 when the record of the work is.
• Against T3-105: Is the work kept as it was (T3-105), or remade in another medium (T3-057)?
• Against T3-156: Is the mark adopted as the room's emblem (T3-156), or remade in another medium (T3-057)?
• Against T3-054: Is the work carried to another canvas of the same kind (T3-054), or into another medium (T3-057)?
• Against T3-131: Is the work remade for its own sake (T3-057), or sold (T3-131)?
• Against T3-148: Is art the canvas never held imagined (T3-148), or the work that stood remade elsewhere (T3-057)?
• Varies: From one member's wallpaper of the room's spot to the whole canvas rebuilt block by block in Minecraft.
• Is not: A timelapse of the room's spot shared after the close (T3-105).
• Exemplars: "I recreated the entire /r/place in Minecraft (Download in comments!)" (minecraft c0188, rivals c0173 c0243); "Made some wallpapers from our spot on /r/place!" (touhou c0206, rivals c0225); "The r/prequelmemes drawing on r/place inspired me" (animalcrossing c0112)

T3-112 entering the work in atlases

Members get the room's work entered in a shared atlas, wiki or list of canvas works. Floor: stevenuniverse and redpandas, unlike in size (stevenuniverse holds 5,907 items in the window and redpandas 79, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's work entered in an atlas, wiki or list of the canvas: asking someone to add it, writing the entry, finding it listed.
• Must not show: The room's own screenshots or timelapses (T3-105); credit given to the makers within the room (T3-043).
• Decide when both: An atlas entry shared with screenshots: T3-112 when the entry is the subject, T3-105 when the screenshots are.
• Against T3-105: Is the work kept in the room's own screenshots or timelapses (T3-105), or entered in a shared atlas or wiki (T3-112)?
• Against T3-043: Are the makers credited within the room (T3-043), or the work entered in a shared list (T3-112)?
• Varies: From a request that someone add the room to a wiki to a written atlas entry with its credits.
• Is not: A member posting a timelapse of the room's mark (T3-105).
• Exemplars: "Someone should probably add AOE to: https://www.erwinolie.nl/place/doku.php" (aoe2 c0208); "There's a project going on at r/placeatlas to preserve the artwork at the place." (stevenuniverse c0489); "We are in the unofficial wiki too." (redpandas c0063)

T3-127 seeking the creators' notice

Members hope or ask that the fandom's creators, streamer, team or staff notice the canvas work, and celebrate when they do. Floor: sakuragakuin and TeamDignitas, unlike in size (sakuragakuin holds 660 items in the window and TeamDignitas 66, over twice as many).

• Must show: The notice of the people the room is about sought or celebrated: showing the work to the staff, waiting for the streamer's reaction, 'they noticed us'.
• Must not show: The creator's wishes followed (T3-197); press coverage (T3-147); canvas visitors led to the sub (T3-044).
• Decide when both: A creator's notice inside a celebration: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-127 added when the notice has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-197: Is the creator's notice sought (T3-127), or the creator's wishes followed (T3-197)?
• Against T3-147: Is the notice sought from the fandom's own creators (T3-127), or from the press (T3-147)?
• Against T3-044: Is the notice of the creators sought (T3-127), or are canvas visitors led into the sub (T3-044)?
• Varies: From hoping a streamer reacts on stream to a team account noticing the logo.
• Is not: Members keeping the author's name off the canvas as the author asked (T3-197).
• Exemplars: "Let the meme stay alive, let's see summit's reaction to this" (Summit1G c0038); "Can we show this to the staff room-teachers on Twitter?" (sakuragakuin c0035, rivals c0036); "They noticed us!!!!!!!" (TeamDignitas c0036)

T3-131 arguing over selling canvas art

Members argue over someone selling prints, posters or templates of the shared canvas work. Floor: kanye and heyyea, unlike in size (kanye holds 4,101 items in the window and heyyea 55, over twice as many).

• Must show: Sale of the canvas work argued: accusations of profiting from others' work, defences of the price, giveaways offered in answer, questions why anyone would pay.
• Must not show: Prizes for helpers (T3-159); the work kept as keepsakes with no sale (T3-105, T3-057).
• Decide when both: A sale answered with a giveaway: T3-131; prizes offered to those who placed: T3-159.
• Against T3-159: Is a sale of the work argued over (T3-131), or helpers rewarded with prizes (T3-159)?
• Against T3-057: Is the work remade for its own sake (T3-057), or sold (T3-131)?
• Against T3-105: Is the sale of prints or templates of the work argued (T3-131), or the work saved as it stood with no sale (T3-105)?
• Varies: From a plug for merchandise to a thread calling the seller a thief.
• Is not: A room giving a prize to its most active placer (T3-159).
• Exemplars: "You're profiting from the work of others, by definition, you are a thief." (donaldglover c0141, rivals c0139); "this is wack you're taking the work of multiple communities, printing it, and selling it back to them." (kanye c0445, rivals c0433 c0434); "Honest question, why would you need to buy the template?" (heyyea c0005)

T3-147 sharing the work's press coverage

Members share or remark on press, news or viral coverage that showed the room's work. Floor: suomi and AcePlace, unlike in size (suomi holds 5,336 items in the window and AcePlace 601, over twice as many).

• Must show: Coverage of the work by the press or a viral page shared or remarked: an article screenshot, a reporter teased, a story that featured the flag.
• Must not show: The fandom's creators noticing (T3-127); the finished work celebrated with no coverage (T3-009).
• Decide when both: Coverage shared in a celebration: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-147 added when the coverage has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-127: Is the coverage by the press (T3-147), or the notice of the fandom's own creators (T3-127)?
• Against T3-009: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or its coverage shared (T3-147)?
• Against T3-164: Is visibility felt on the canvas (T3-164), or press coverage shared (T3-147)?
• Varies: From pride that a story showed the flag to teasing the reporter who wrote it.
• Is not: A streamer reacting to the room's logo (T3-127).
• Exemplars: "The article with a...flattering title" (starlightstage c0122, rivals c0115); "Asexual pride featured on a story about /r/place!" (AcePlace c0041); "Hiljainen uutispäivä, kun Henrik Kärkkäisellä on aikaa katsella työaikana Kaarle Kustaan viiksien kasvamista redditissä" (suomi c0258)

G21 after the canvas closed

T3-009 celebrating the finished work

Members mark the room's own finished or nearly finished work as achieved: we did it, pride, congratulations, the final image. Floor: indieheads and crystalclear, unlike in size (indieheads holds 5,817 items in the window and crystalclear 18, over twice as many).

• Must show: The room's work marked as achieved: 'we did it', pride, congratulations, a final image posted as done, the work said to have lasted to the end.
• Must not show: Victory over rivals (T3-154); the makers credited by name or part (T3-043); allies thanked (T3-072); what working together meant (T3-157); the mark announced as up while the work goes on (T3-026); grief for a loss (T3-029).
• Decide when both: Celebration with thanks or credit: the side with more concepts is primary. T3-043, T3-072 or T3-157 is primary when the thanks, the allies or the reflection hold more concepts than the celebrating, and is added only where its part has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-154: Is the room's own work celebrated (T3-009), or victory over a rival claimed (T3-154)?
• Against T3-043: Is the work celebrated (T3-009), or its makers credited (T3-043)?
• Against T3-157: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or what working together meant reflected on (T3-157)?
• Against T3-026: Is the work finished and celebrated (T3-009), or the mark announced as being up (T3-026)?
• Against T3-029: Is the work celebrated (T3-009), or its loss mourned (T3-029)?
• Against T3-003: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or one's own part in it told (T3-003)?
• Against T3-031: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or the room's joke played (T3-031)?
• Against T3-038: Is the work under way (T3-038), or finished and celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-104: Is the work going on (T3-104), or done and celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-105: Is the work celebrated (T3-009), or saved as a record (T3-105)?
• Against T3-117: Is the end marked (T3-117), or the work celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-145: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or national belonging voiced (T3-145)?
• Against T3-147: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or its coverage shared (T3-147)?
• Against T3-164: Is the work celebrated (T3-009), or support felt through it (T3-164)?
• Against T3-186: Is the work celebrated online (T3-009), or a meeting in person proposed (T3-186)?
• Against T3-072: Is the room's own finished work celebrated (T3-009), or other rooms thanked for their help (T3-072)?
• Against T3-073: Is what happened to the work told (T3-073), or the finished work celebrated (T3-009)?
• Varies: From a one-line 'we did it' to long posts with the final image, pride and thanks.
• Is not: A county room boasting that its flag outlasted a rival's (T3-154).
• Exemplars: "We did it! Place is over and our tag is on it! :D" (crystalclear c0006); "297 finished, well done ladies and gents!" (puzzleanddragons c0142); "Truly a great achievement, we should all be proud" (indieheads c0197)

T3-029 mourning the lost work

Members grieve for the room's work, or a work they cared for, once it is covered, erased or left unfinished. Floor: overwatch and duckgame, unlike in size (overwatch holds 45,381 items in the window and duckgame 130, over twice as many).

• Must show: Grief or loss voiced for a work: RIP, it's gone, very sad, the lost flag that never stops hurting.
• Must not show: Blame laid after the close (T3-058); the end of the canvas itself mourned (T3-117); what happened told without grief (T3-073); the work moved elsewhere (T3-022).
• Decide when both: Grief with blame: T3-029 when grief leads, T3-058 added when blame has concepts of its own. Grief with an account: T3-029 when grief leads, T3-073 when the account does.
• Against T3-058: Is the loss grieved (T3-029), or blame laid for it (T3-058)?
• Against T3-117: Is a work's loss grieved (T3-029), or the end of the canvas itself (T3-117)?
• Against T3-073: Is grief voiced (T3-029), or what happened told without it (T3-073)?
• Against T3-009: Is the work mourned (T3-029), or celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-059: Is the loss mourned (T3-029), or is giving up urged (T3-059)?
• Against T3-148: Is art that never stood imagined (T3-148), or work that stood mourned (T3-029)?
• Against T3-160: Is a dead person honoured by the work (T3-160), or the lost work mourned (T3-029)?
• Against T3-181: Is the loss mourned (T3-029), or the effort abandoned (T3-181)?
• Against T3-183: Is the room's own lost work mourned (T3-029), or others' art the room covered (T3-183)?
• Against T3-022: Is the lost work grieved (T3-029), or moved or restarted elsewhere (T3-022)?
• Varies: From a bare 'RIP' to a long lament for a lost flag and every lost fight.
• Is not: A member saying the canvas is over and it was fun (T3-117).
• Exemplars: "RIP the overwatch logo on r/place" (overwatch c1065); "RIP in peace, sombrero duck. You died too young." (duckgame c0052); "the flag we've lost, every fight we've lost. never stop hurting" (indonesia c0203)

T3-043 crediting who made the work

Members thank or credit the people who made, defended or perfected the work, or claim their own part in it. Floor: DestinyTheGame and hsv, unlike in size (DestinyTheGame holds 45,483 items in the window and hsv 229, over twice as many).

• Must show: Credit given for the work: thanks to those who helped, named makers, a member claiming a change they made, disputes over who made it.
• Must not show: Another room thanked as an ally (T3-072); the work celebrated with no one credited (T3-009); the work entered in an atlas (T3-112).
• Decide when both: Credit and celebration together: the side with more concepts is primary, the other added only where its part has concepts of its own; a thread whose concepts are mostly thanks to the makers is T3-043.
• Against T3-072: Are the room's own makers and helpers credited (T3-043), or another room thanked as an ally (T3-072)?
• Against T3-009: Are the makers credited (T3-043), or the work celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-003: Is credit given or claimed after the work (T3-043), or one member's placing reported as it is done (T3-003)?
• Against T3-104: Are builders encouraged (T3-104), or the makers credited (T3-043)?
• Against T3-112: Are the makers credited within the room (T3-043), or the work entered in a shared list (T3-112)?
• Against T3-159: Is credit given in words (T3-043), or a prize given (T3-159)?
• Varies: From a general 'thanks to everyone who helped' to a dispute over who drew a figure.
• Is not: A room thanking a neighbouring room that defended its logo (T3-072).
• Exemplars: "I'd like to thank everyone who participated in creating, defending, and perfecting our Destiny Tricorn emblem in /r/place." (DestinyTheGame c0223); "i have to say i was the one that changes it from CS:6O to CS:GO shameless bragging" (globaloffensive c1108); "Thanks to everyone who helped, you know who you are!" (hsv c0092)

T3-054 carrying work to new canvases

Members take up or turn down a later canvas: rebuilding there, planning for next time, or declining to start again. Floor: terraria and CelticFc, unlike in size (terraria holds 1,747 items in the window and CelticFc 62, over twice as many).

• Must show: A later canvas answered either way: the work rebuilt on a clone site, members invited to one, plans for the next canvas, or a refusal to start again.
• Must not show: The sub given a new purpose with no canvas (T3-111); the work remade in another medium (T3-057); the end marked with a bare hope it returns (T3-117); a new spot on the same canvas after a loss (T3-022).
• Decide when both: A sub's future that includes a new canvas: T3-054 when the canvas is the plan, T3-111 when the sub's purpose is.
• Against T3-111: Is the work carried to another canvas (T3-054), or the sub given a new purpose (T3-111)?
• Against T3-057: Is the work carried to another canvas (T3-054), or remade in another medium (T3-057)?
• Against T3-117: Is a later canvas taken up, planned or turned down (T3-054), or the end marked with a hope the event returns (T3-117)?
• Against T3-022: Does the work move to a new spot on the same canvas (T3-022), or to another canvas (T3-054)?
• Against T3-148: Is missed art imagined (T3-148), or a later canvas planned (T3-054)?
• Varies: From a one-line link to a clone site to a room rebuilding its art there alone, and from eager plans to a refusal to start again.
• Is not: A room moving its logo to new coordinates after losing its spot (T3-022).
• Exemplars: "this website is essentially r/place v2, and has bot protection, I built night's edge in it by myself" (terraria c0146); "we can do this again..http://pxls.space/" (aoe2 c0160); "We should see about doing the Celtic logo next year." (CelticFc c0018)

T3-072 thanking the room's allies

Members thank other rooms that helped and tell the story of who stood with the room. Floor: mylittlepony and wales, unlike in size (mylittlepony holds 3,264 items in the window and wales 530, over twice as many).

• Must show: Another room thanked for help, or the alliance's story told: which rooms stood with the room, who tried to save the work, the alliance that made it.
• Must not show: The room's own makers credited (T3-043); ties proposed beyond the canvas (T3-158); greetings with no help behind them (T3-122); an alliance formed for a fight (T3-150).
• Decide when both: Thanks to allies inside a celebration: the side with more concepts is primary, T3-009 when the celebrating holds more; the other added only where its part has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-043: Is another room thanked as an ally (T3-072), or the room's own makers credited (T3-043)?
• Against T3-158: Are allies thanked for the canvas (T3-072), or ties proposed beyond it (T3-158)?
• Against T3-122: Is help thanked (T3-072), or a greeting sent with no help behind it (T3-122)?
• Against T3-150: Is an alliance formed for the fight (T3-150), or thanked and told afterwards (T3-072)?
• Against T3-009: Is the room's own finished work celebrated (T3-009), or other rooms thanked for their help (T3-072)?
• Against T3-157: Are allies thanked (T3-072), or the meaning of working together reflected on (T3-157)?
• Against T3-104: Are those placing cheered on while the work goes on (T3-104), or other rooms thanked for their help (T3-072)?
• Against T3-159: Are helpers given a prize (T3-159), or other rooms thanked with no prize (T3-072)?
• Varies: From one line of thanks to a named sub to the full story of a two-nation alliance.
• Is not: A thread thanking the members who placed the room's logo (T3-043).
• Exemplars: "Also, special thanks go out to the people at /r/SaveDashie !" (mylittlepony c0223); "With our alliance with r/FaroeIslands, we did it! Well done everyone!" (wales c0038); "Our creeper didn't get totally over-ran, thanks to you all (mindcrack and Dutch) here for trying to save him in the final hours." (mindcrack c0133)

T3-073 reporting how the work fared

Members report what happened to the work, live or after the close: what was covered, moved, repaired or survived. Floor: nintendo and toolband, unlike in size (nintendo holds 7,065 items in the window and toolband 1,155, over twice as many).

• Must show: What happened to the work told: live reports of changes and attacks, what survived, what was moved and why, the story of its fights afterwards.
• Must not show: Progress of the first build (T3-038); grief (T3-029); blame (T3-058); a celebration (T3-009); fights retold as fandom lore (T3-135); what a detail means (T3-018).
• Decide when both: An account with grief or celebration: the side with more concepts is primary.
• Against T3-038: Is the first build's progress reported (T3-038), or what happened to the work once it stood (T3-073)?
• Against T3-021: Is what happened told (T3-073), or the work watched and repaired (T3-021)?
• Against T3-029: Is the account plain (T3-073), or grief voiced (T3-029)?
• Against T3-135: Is the work's history told plainly (T3-073), or as fandom lore (T3-135)?
• Against T3-009: Is what happened to the work told (T3-073), or the finished work celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-018: Is what a detail means explained (T3-018), or what happened to the work told (T3-073)?
• Against T3-058: Is what happened to the work told (T3-073), or a named room blamed for its loss after the close (T3-058)?
• Varies: From a live report that a figure is being turned into another to a written legacy of the work after the close.
• Is not: A member posting the coordinates of the half-built logo (T3-038).
• Exemplars: "The Mario on Rainbow Road has turned into Luigi and is currently being turned into Waluigi." (nintendo c0125); "I know, we had to move it. I spent about 8 hours making that one." (roosterteeth c0130); "It'a a part of the story. We literally had to work to do this." (toolband c0212)

T3-105 saving screenshots and timelapses

Members save or share the work as it stood: screenshots, timelapses, final images, requests to save it before it changes. Floor: placehearts and AprilKnights, unlike in size (placehearts holds 1,582 items in the window and AprilKnights 218, over twice as many).

• Must show: The work kept as it was: screenshots, timelapses, final images posted as records, requests that someone save it.
• Must not show: The work remade in another medium (T3-057); entered in an atlas (T3-112); adopted as the sub's emblem (T3-156); celebrated (T3-009).
• Decide when both: A final image posted in celebration: T3-009 when the celebration leads, T3-105 added when the record has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-057: Is the work kept as it was (T3-105), or remade in another medium (T3-057)?
• Against T3-112: Is the work kept in the room's own screenshots or timelapses (T3-105), or entered in a shared atlas or wiki (T3-112)?
• Against T3-156: Is the work kept as a record (T3-105), or put on the sub's banner, flair or sidebar (T3-156)?
• Against T3-009: Is the work celebrated (T3-009), or saved as a record (T3-105)?
• Against T3-077: Is the timelapse used to keep the work (T3-105), or the work designed to move in it (T3-077)?
• Against T3-100: Is the canvas work saved in screenshots and timelapses (T3-105), or an April Fools change kept in use (T3-100)?
• Against T3-131: Is the sale of prints or templates of the work argued (T3-131), or the work saved as it stood with no sale (T3-105)?
• Varies: From a request to screenshot the logo before night to a timelapse of the work from its first pixel.
• Is not: A Minecraft rebuild of the canvas (T3-057).
• Exemplars: "can someone screenshot it in case it gets removed overnight?" (nbaspurs c0205); "Time lapse video of Placehearts from the beginning" (placehearts c0253); "Screenshot of our logo and The Button in mint condition" (AprilKnights c0075)

T3-111 repurposing the canvas sub

Members decide what the sub or chat made for the canvas becomes once the canvas closes. Floor: TheFarLeftSide and loliconsunite, unlike in size (TheFarLeftSide holds 3,737 items in the window and loliconsunite 252, over twice as many).

• Must show: The canvas sub's or chat's future argued or decided: kept for another purpose, kept as a community, asked whether it will survive.
• Must not show: The work carried to a new canvas (T3-054); ties with other rooms proposed (T3-158); a canvas sub opened (T3-090).
• Decide when both: A sub's future that includes a new canvas: T3-054 when the canvas is the plan, T3-111 when the sub's purpose is.
• Against T3-054: Is the sub given a new purpose (T3-111), or the work carried to another canvas (T3-054)?
• Against T3-090: Is a sub opened for the canvas (T3-090), or its use after the canvas decided (T3-111)?
• Against T3-158: Is the room's own sub repurposed (T3-111), or ties with another room proposed (T3-158)?
• Varies: From a question whether the sub will survive to a vote to keep it for political discussion.
• Is not: A room inviting its members onto a clone canvas (T3-054).
• Exemplars: "Can we keep this subreddit post-place for united leftist discussion?" (TheFarLeftSide c0212, rivals c0357 c0637); "I vote we stay an sub, even though r/place has ended" (farmcarrots c0181); "Will this subreddit stay alive now that r/place has ended?" (loliconsunite c0080)

T3-117 marking the canvas's end

Members register that the canvas has ended: it's over, regret, signing off, hoping it returns. Floor: spacexmasterrace and earthbound, unlike in size (spacexmasterrace holds 1,463 items in the window and earthbound 547, over twice as many).

• Must show: The end of the canvas registered: 'place is over', regret at the end, signing off, a hope that it returns.
• Must not show: The room's work mourned (T3-029); the work celebrated (T3-009); a later canvas taken up or planned (T3-054).
• Decide when both: The end marked in a celebration: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-117 added where the end has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-029: Is the end of the canvas marked (T3-117), or a work's loss grieved (T3-029)?
• Against T3-009: Is the end marked (T3-117), or the work celebrated (T3-009)?
• Against T3-054: Is the end marked with a hope it returns (T3-117), or a later canvas taken up, planned or turned down (T3-054)?
• Varies: From a bare 'it's over' to a sign-off hoping the event comes back next April.
• Is not: A room's lament that its logo was covered (T3-029).
• Exemplars: "Unfortunately, place is now over." (spacexmasterrace c0114); "Oh... well, it's over. It's been fun you guys o7" (earthbound c0069); "Maybe next April 1 again? :)" (sakuragakuin c0070)

T3-148 imagining art the canvas missed

Members imagine art the canvas never held: what the work was meant to look like, what they would have drawn. Floor: zelda and miamidolphins, unlike in size (zelda holds 9,309 items in the window and miamidolphins 1,351, over twice as many).

• Must show: Art that did not reach the canvas imagined: the work as it was supposed to look, a design shown too late, what might have been.
• Must not show: Plans for a later canvas (T3-054); grief for work that stood (T3-029); the work that stood remade elsewhere (T3-057).
• Decide when both: Imagined art with grief: T3-148 when the missed art is described, T3-029 when grief leads.
• Against T3-054: Is missed art imagined (T3-148), or a later canvas planned (T3-054)?
• Against T3-029: Is art that never stood imagined (T3-148), or work that stood mourned (T3-029)?
• Against T3-057: Is art the canvas never held imagined (T3-148), or the work that stood remade elsewhere (T3-057)?
• Varies: From a joke that the mushroom guys never got a spot to an edited final image showing the work as planned.
• Is not: Plans for what to build on the next canvas (T3-054).
• Exemplars: "I just took the final image and photoshopped what our 'place" was supposed to look like." (frc c0149); "Damn, that is pretty amazing. What if we would of got this on /r/place lol" (zelda c0198); "Imagine if we had left it as Sushi..." (miamidolphins c0155)

T3-156 adopting the mark as emblem

Members take the canvas mark into the sub's identity: banner, sidebar, flair, avatar or a room joke. Floor: bakchodi and TreePlace, unlike in size (bakchodi holds 2,741 items in the window and TreePlace 31, over twice as many).

• Must show: The canvas mark taken into the sub: a banner, header, sidebar, flair, emoji or avatar from the work, or a detail of the final image made the room's sign.
• Must not show: Screenshots or timelapses kept (T3-105); the work remade in another medium (T3-057); the room's existing joke played (T3-031).
• Decide when both: A banner request with a screenshot: T3-156 when the sub's look is the point, T3-105 when the record is.
• Against T3-105: Is the mark put on the sub's banner, flair or sidebar (T3-156), or kept as a record (T3-105)?
• Against T3-057: Is the mark adopted as the sub's sign (T3-156), or remade in another medium (T3-057)?
• Against T3-031: Does a canvas detail become the room's sign (T3-156), or is the room's existing joke played (T3-031)?
• Varies: From a request for a commemorative flair to the finished image set as the sub's header.
• Is not: A timelapse of the logo shared after the close (T3-105).
• Exemplars: "REPLACE THE CSS BANNER WITH COMPLETE ONE" (touhou c0148); "Can we get it on the banner pls, or the side bar?" (zootopia c0163); "we need a special flair to commemorate this event" (bakchodi c0241)

T3-157 reflecting on working together

Members say what the shared effort meant: strangers cooperating, the community as the point. Floor: wholesomememes and xcom, unlike in size (wholesomememes holds 6,915 items in the window and xcom 1,535, over twice as many).

• Must show: What working together meant: cooperation with strangers, the community effort as what made the work, redditors creating amid chaos.
• Must not show: The work celebrated (T3-009); allies thanked (T3-072); the canvas's worth argued (T3-037); support felt by a group (T3-164).
• Decide when both: Reflection inside a celebration: the side with more concepts is primary, T3-009 when the celebrating holds more; the other added only where its part has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-009: Is the finished work celebrated (T3-009), or what working together meant reflected on (T3-157)?
• Against T3-072: Are allies thanked (T3-072), or the meaning of working together reflected on (T3-157)?
• Against T3-037: Is the canvas's worth argued (T3-037), or what working together meant reflected on (T3-157)?
• Against T3-164: Is the meaning of working together reflected on (T3-157), or support and visibility felt by the group (T3-164)?
• Varies: From a line that the community effort made the flag to an essay on strangers linked by the event.
• Is not: A room's 'we did it' post with the final image (T3-009).
• Exemplars: "I still feel like a good outcome of the event is people talking to and cooperating with people they'd otherwise have no reason to." (xcom c0063); "The community effort is what made it amazing." (pakistan c0186); "When redditors come together to create something amidst chaos" (wholesomememes c0010)

T3-158 proposing ties beyond the canvas

Members carry a tie with another room past the canvas: trading recommendations, crossovers, sister cities, exchanges. Floor: parahumans and rhythmheaven, unlike in size (parahumans holds 1,829 items in the window and rhythmheaven 99, over twice as many).

• Must show: A tie with another room proposed or kept beyond the canvas: trading each other's games or books, crossover threads, cultural exchanges, friendships kept.
• Must not show: Allies thanked for the canvas (T3-072); the room's own sub repurposed (T3-111); greetings with nothing proposed (T3-122).
• Decide when both: Thanks to allies with a proposal: T3-072 when the thanks lead, T3-158 added when the proposal has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-072: Are allies thanked for the canvas (T3-072), or ties proposed beyond it (T3-158)?
• Against T3-111: Is a tie with another room proposed (T3-158), or the room's own sub repurposed (T3-111)?
• Against T3-122: Is a greeting sent (T3-122), or a tie beyond the canvas proposed (T3-158)?
• Against T3-186: Is a tie between rooms proposed (T3-158), or members invited to meet in person (T3-186)?
• Varies: From trading recommendations between two fandoms to finding that two cities are already sister cities.
• Is not: A thank-you to the neighbour that helped hold the logo (T3-072).
• Exemplars: "may ours try your game and yours try ours." (rhythmheaven c0075, rivals c0079); "Annapolis is actually already sister cities with Karlskrona, Sweden" (maryland c0273); "Came here on recommendation from /r/mylittlepony." (parahumans c0125)

T3-164 feeling supported through the canvas

Members find support, visibility or comfort through the canvas: a flag that says 'we are here', not being alone. Floor: asktransgender and AcePlace, unlike in size (asktransgender holds 6,413 items in the window and AcePlace 601, over twice as many).

• Must show: Support or visibility felt through the canvas: a group's flag as proof it is seen, comfort in hard times, not being alone.
• Must not show: What working together meant in general (T3-157); the work celebrated (T3-009); press coverage (T3-147).
• Decide when both: Visibility felt in a celebration: T3-009 when the work is celebrated, T3-164 added where the support has concepts of its own.
• Against T3-157: Is support or visibility felt by the group (T3-164), or the meaning of working together reflected on (T3-157)?
• Against T3-009: Is the work celebrated (T3-009), or support felt through it (T3-164)?
• Against T3-147: Is visibility felt on the canvas (T3-164), or press coverage shared (T3-147)?
• Varies: From trans and asexual members seeing their flag hold to a British member cheered amid Brexit by an alliance.
• Is not: A thread on how strangers cooperated on the canvas (T3-157).
• Exemplars: "Small victories are some of the best you can have. We have shown in some small way that we are here." (asktransgender c0139); "been rather depressed about brexit or the shit surrounding it. I just wanted to say seeing this tonight cheered me up immensely" (italy c0267); "the most space I've seen the Ace community take up on a public space" (AcePlace c0065)

T3-186 celebrating the feat in person

Rare tier. A member invites others to meet in person to celebrate the canvas work.

• Must show: An invitation to meet offline, for dinner, a drink or a barbecue, to celebrate what the room made.
• Must not show: Celebration online (T3-009); ties proposed between rooms (T3-158).
• Decide when both: An invitation inside a celebration: T3-186 when the meeting is proposed, T3-009 when it is not.
• Against T3-009: Is the work celebrated online (T3-009), or a meeting in person proposed (T3-186)?
• Against T3-158: Is a tie between rooms proposed (T3-158), or members invited to meet in person (T3-186)?
• Varies: One room's case: an invitation to dinner, beer or a barbecue.
• Is not: A thank-you post with the final image (T3-009).
• Exemplars: "If anyone would like to go out for dinner/beer or BBQ you should message me! It would be great to celebrate this feat in Person!" (SwissNeutralityZone c0108)

Transmission, decomposed (stage B4, section 3)

Computed at B4a-01, before any ruling touched assign_final.jsonl (out/_analysis/b4_prepare.py, b4_transmission.py).

Over which items. The rows exist only where my own answer is on record: the 40 gold items (gold_items.jsonl) and the 50 items stage B2 piloted (author_items.jsonl). My answer is the latest recheck in rechecks-B2.jsonl, which all 90 carry; my confidence is the file's. The readers are stage B3's two corpus replicates of each item; they agree when their sets are equal. For the gold items, the seeded copies' commonest set and its share are given beside, as a second view; the seeded placements enter no rate. Outside the gold and pilot items my answer does not exist, so the split rate there cannot be decomposed, and nothing here is extrapolated from the gold set, which was drawn to be hard.

The next table counts the items in each row, gold and pilot apart.

My answer was 'clear' on 9 of the 90 items (4 gold, 5 pilot) and 'arguable' on 81, so a split mostly lands in row 3, kept as a finding, and row 2 holds one item.

Row 2: fails to transmit (1 items)

The readers split where I was confident: a wording defect, the sentence stage C1 must repair.

Row 3: the instrument does not decide this item (18 items)

The readers split and I was unsure too: the instrument does not decide these items. Kept as a finding, never revised away.

Row 4: teaches something unintended (20 items)

Both readers agreed with each other and not with me. Each is read and split both ways: I was wrong, or the scheme taught something I did not intend.

Row 1: the scheme decides (51 items)

The scheme decides: both readers placed the set I placed.

By family

The next table gives each family's items in rows 2, 3 and 4 (the family of my primary).

What row 4 says

Which way each went. 11 of the 20 went against me: I was wrong (AyyMD/t08, cloud9/t12, cubers/t27, DevonUK/t04, dofus/t01, floridagators/t04, harrypotter/t08, natsume/t01, overwatch/t23, Slovakia/t07, uiuc/t04). 9 went against the scheme: it taught something I did not intend (alberta/t04, finland/t06, Goodboye/t03, ireland/t12, korea/t15, mit/t01, nVade/t04, parabola/t02, uofmn/t01).

Rule 0's added theme did not transmit. On alberta t04, finland t06, korea t15 and mit t01 the primary's own decide_when_both tells the reader to add the second theme 'under rule 0', and both readers placed one theme. Readers apply rule 0's single placement more strictly than the scheme's pairing sentences ask. This is the same lean stage B2 found, and stage C1 should read these four sentences first.

Rule 2 keeps themes both readers left out. 11 of the 20 row-4 items are class 2, so assign_final.jsonl keeps my B1 grouping on them, the readers' list first, then B1's other themes (J, 12 October). On 8 of those (AyyMD/t08, cubers/t27, DevonUK/t04, floridagators/t04, harrypotter/t08, natsume/t01, overwatch/t23, uiuc/t04) I judge the kept theme wrong on reading. The class-2 lines stand as J ruled; this is reported, not overruled, and no agreed item outside these 90 was re-read in search of more.

What this licenses. The readers share an architecture with me and with each other, so these rows bound whether the instrument decides, not whether it is right. A row 1 item says the written scheme reached two readers the way I meant it; it does not say the placement is true of the room.

Transmission after revision, stage B4

Written at B4c, 2026-10-13. This file measures whether fresh readers holding only the frozen scheme reach the line I settled. It is transmission after revision (FLEET.md, section 2). It is not reliability in the intercoder sense and is never called that. The settled line is assign_final.jsonl at sha256 d3506a88…, as left at B4a-07; this check revises no ruling. The declarations were made in notes-B4.md before any figure ("The check (B4c)").

What every figure here licenses. Readers share an architecture with me, and arm 1's readers share one with the fleet, so each figure bounds whether the written instrument decides, not whether it is right.

The definition, stated once

Stage B2's definition, unchanged (notes-B2.md):

• Two placement sets agree by their Jaccard index. ["T3-004"] against ["T3-004","T3-011"] scores 0.5, partial agreement.
• Fresh against settled is the mean Jaccard of each fresh reading against the settled set, over readings whose settled line is resolved. The exact rate (Jaccard 1, the outcome "agrees") and the primary match rate stand beside it.
• The readers' agreement with each other is the mean Jaccard of the two readings of an item, over items. Primary match stands beside it.
• Alpha is Krippendorff's alpha with distance 1 − Jaccard and chance over the pooled sets of the comparison.
• Scoring reads pass 1 only.
• A reading whose settled line is unresolved is "disagrees-unresolved": it leaves the denominator and is counted.

The two arms, never pooled

• Arm 1. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash, served as probed), medium reasoning effort, max_tokens 128,000, through the gateway (_fleet_raw/B4/arm.json). Two fresh readers per packet; no instructions beyond the message. This is the model stage B3's fleet ran and stage B2's gold round ran (there on the direct route), so arm 1's figures can stand beside theirs. Its readings are in reassign.jsonl.
• Arm 2. OpenAI gpt-6-astra, medium effort, two replications per packet, run by the Codex orchestrator on J's computer from byte-identical copies of the same messages, under Codex's built-in instruction (recorded by hash in _control/isolation-PASS.json) and with no tools. Its readings are in reassign-openai-astra.jsonl. No earlier stage ran this model, so its figures stand beside nothing but arm 1's.
• Strata. Uniform (U, 250 items) and adjudicated (A, 250 items) are scored against the settled line. R (all 185 unresolved items) has no settled line and is reported last, apart.
• Readings. Arm 1 has 999: one reading was refused at assembly (S05-23, reader r8, position 3 typed its room's name wrong; notes-B4.md). Arm 2 has 1,000.

The headline figures

The next table gives fresh against settled and the readers' agreement with each other, per arm and stratum, with stage B3's two readers on the same items beside them.

The reference figures: stage B3's corpus agreement is 0.786 with alpha 0.782 (handback-B3.md); the stability floor is 0.807 (stability-B2.md); stage B2's gold fidelity is 0.624 and stage B3's is 0.645.

• Arm 1's readers agree with each other exactly as much as the fleet did on the uniform stratum. Both pairs score 0.781. Both sit under the stability floor of 0.807. stability-B2.md reads that floor as the share of placements that differ between readers whatever the wording, so a figure inside it says nothing about the scheme.
• The fresh readers reach the settled line less often than they reach each other. In U, arm 1 scores 0.657 against the settled line and 0.781 against each other. Part of the gap is how the settled line was built (the class 2 row below), and part is the adjudication (the adjudicated rows).
• On the adjudicated stratum the fleet's figure is low by selection. Stratum A was drawn from items the fleet split on or that my B1 grouping did not match. The fresh readers agree with each other more there (0.664 and 0.804) than the fleet did (0.514). Some of that rise is regression toward the corpus mean, and none of it is evidence that the rulings transmit.
• Arm 2's readers agree with each other far more than arm 1's, but not more with the settled line. See "Arm 2's two replications" below for why that agreement is not two independent readers.

The uniform stratum, split

The next table splits U by how each item's settled line was made. Class 2 is the validator's rule-2 row, b1_grouping_kept: the two B3 readers agreed on a proper subset of my B1 grouping, and the settled line kept my whole grouping. Those extra B1 themes were placed under the B1 scheme, never by a reader holding the frozen one, and never adjudicated.

• Where the fleet agreed and my B1 grouping matched, fresh DeepSeek readers reach the line nine times in ten (class 1, exact 0.902). Fresh OpenAI readers reach it in three of four (0.736).
• Class 2 is where the settled line and every reader part. Against the settled line, arm 1 agrees exactly in 11 of 106 readings. Against the themes the line places with concepts, it agrees in 68. The difference is my B1 themes that the class 2 rule kept. The 51 class 2 items a fresh reader placed elsewhere are each named below. In 22 of them no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed my kept themes. In 18 the fleet's placement goes against a field of the scheme. In 13 of those, the fresh readers placed a B1 theme, or its sibling, that the fleet had left out. In the other 5, they placed a theme that neither the fleet nor my B1 grouping had placed.
• The adjudicated items in U behave like stratum A (0.517 and 0.535 against 0.544 and 0.554).

The adjudicated stratum, by class

The next table splits A by the class that sent each item to adjudication.

Class 5 has two resolved items in A; its row is shown and not read.

The comparison §12 names

The next table counts each reading's outcome against the settled line.

• "Disagrees-contested" is a reading on an item disagreements.jsonl rules (classes 3, 4 and 5). "Disagrees-unanimous" is a reading on an item it never ruled (classes 1 and 2), where the two B3 readers agreed and their list stood. "Disagrees-unresolved" readings leave the denominator: 6 in U (3 items) and 30 in A (15 items), per arm.
• The two rates. In U, arm 1 disagrees with the settled line on 0.742 of readings of contested items (213) and on 0.400 of readings of unanimous items (280); on class 1 alone, 0.098 (17 of 174). Arm 2: 0.673, 0.489, and 0.264 (46 of 174). In A, arm 1 disagrees on 0.713 of 470 and arm 2 on 0.679.
• The same split again. Of arm 1's disagrees-contested readings, 0.462 in U and 0.579 in A equal one of the fleet's two placements or my B1 grouping. For arm 2 the shares are 0.382 and 0.401. Where a boundary split the fleet, more than half of DeepSeek's disagreeing readings in A land where an earlier reading already stood. That is the boundary splitting again, not a new problem. The OpenAI readers land outside the earlier placements more often.
• The unanimous items a fresh reader placed elsewhere: 62 items in arm 1, 74 in arm 2, 79 in either (28 of class 1 and 51 of class 2). Each is named below with a paragraph.

Against stage B2's gold figure

Stage B2's gold fidelity is 0.624: nine DeepSeek V4.1 Flash readers at medium effort against my placements on 40 gold items (pilot_report.md). Arm 1's uniform figure is 0.657, the same model at the same effort. The gold number is the lower of the two by 0.033, so the hard set was harder than the ordinary item, by a small margin. Without class 2, whose settled line is my B1 grouping, the uniform figure is 0.703 and the margin is 0.079. Arm 2's uniform figure (0.622) has no B2 counterpart on its model and is not set beside the gold figure.

Per family

Fresh against settled counts an item in the family of its settled line's first theme. The readers' agreement counts an item in the family of each reader's primary, as stage B3 did. Stage B3's corpus agreement per family stands beside them (out/_analysis/b3_check_record.json). Families with fewer than 10 items in a stratum are shown and not ranked.

The next table gives the uniform stratum by family.

The next table gives the adjudicated stratum by family.

The worst families, ranked on fresh against settled among families with 10 items or more:

• arm 1, uniform: G14 (0.507), G07 (0.569), G08 (0.593);
• arm 1, adjudicated: G10 (0.417), G14 (0.423), G02 (0.479);
• arm 2, uniform: G14 (0.310), G07 (0.425), G08 (0.491);
• arm 2, adjudicated: G07 (0.320), G14 (0.385), G04 (0.443).

G14 (space and help between rooms) is among the three worst in all four. At stage B3 it was not: its corpus agreement was 0.697, and B3's lowest family was G18 at 0.552. G14's themes turn on who asked whom for what: a border settled, help sent, space asked of a host, help asked of a room, a host's approval disputed or given (T3-010, T3-011, T3-035, T3-084, T3-094, T3-162). Their neighbours in G13 and G15 turn on the same questions (T3-039, T3-149, T3-150, T3-151). Several paragraphs below show the fleet and the fresh readers answering them differently.

The per-theme figure stage C1 needs is stage B3's agreement, over every item and every theme (out/_analysis/b3_check_record.json, agreement.themes; handback-B3.md, "Agreement"). It is not recomputed here: 500 items over 197 themes leave most themes with no item in this sample.

Arm 2's two replications

Arm 2's readers agree with each other at 0.872 in U, against arm 1's 0.781. The 18 items read twice (once in a U or A packet and once in an R packet) test that figure on the same items:

• Arm 1: its two readers agree at 0.741 in the U and A packets and 0.796 in the R packets. A reading from one packet agrees with a reading of the same item from the other packet at 0.787 (72 pairs). Agreement within a packet and across packets is about the same.
• Arm 2: its two replications agree at 0.889 in the U and A packets and 0.861 in the R packets. Across packets, the figure falls to 0.653.

The two arm 2 replications of one packet are the same model given byte-identical messages under the same built-in instruction, and they agree with each other more than with the same model reading the same item in another packet. So arm 2's readers' agreement and alpha are an upper bound on what two independent OpenAI readers would show. Arm 1's figures do not show that pattern. Eighteen items are few, and this is a side note.

Stratum R, the 185 unresolved items

R has no settled line. Every item in it is one I found that no placement's test takes. As declared, R reports whether fresh readers converge there, not whether they are right, and no reading changes a ruling. All 185 are read in R packets (readings-R-B4.jsonl, 740 readings).

The next table gives R per arm, with the B3 readers on the same items beside it.

"The earlier placements" are the two B3 readers' sets and my B1 grouping.

The next table gives R by class.

• Fresh DeepSeek readers converge on R items about as often as on contested items (0.623 against 0.664 in A), and more than the fleet did on the same items (0.543).
• Most fresh readings land on a placement someone already made. Arm 1 puts 265 of 370 wholly among the earlier placements. Those are placements I found that no test takes, so convergence there does not resolve the items.
• About a quarter to a third land wholly outside every earlier placement (104 and 134 of 370). In class 5, where I had no B1 grouping, nearly half do.
• The 18 read twice are reported in "Arm 2's two replications" above.

The second pass

Not scored. Arm 1 marked 1 of 1,370 second-pass lines changed; arm 2 marked 17.

What these figures license

Readers share an architecture with me, so every figure in this file bounds whether the written instrument decides, not whether it is right. Arm 1 is the fleet's own model. Arm 2 is another model family, run under Codex's built-in instruction, and its two replications are not independent readers in the fleet's sense. Neither arm can show that a placement is correct. They show where a stranger holding the frozen scheme lands, and how often that is where I settled.

The unanimous items a fresh reader placed elsewhere

These are the 79 items with a disagrees-unanimous reading in either arm: 62 in arm 1's reassign.jsonl, 74 in arm 2's, 28 of class 1 and 51 of class 2. Each paragraph gives the fleet's placement, the settled line and the four fresh readings, then a verdict in one of five fixed phrases:

• the fleet's shared assumption (§12's first reading): a field of the scheme contradicts the fleet's placement. Examples are an unmet must_show, a discriminator that sends the concepts elsewhere, or a concept counted under a theme whose must_not_show names the sibling.
• the settled line keeps my B1 theme(s) (§12's second reading, for class 2): the settled line holds a B1 theme that the class 2 rule kept and that no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed.
• rule 0 applied differently: fresh readers add, drop or list under also_present a theme carried by concepts of its own. Rule 0 makes one placement the default and allows a second "only where one cannot carry the material", and it leaves that judgement to the reader.
• the scheme does not decide: the material meets two gates and no field separates them.
• the fresh reading misses a field: the settled line holds, and the fresh reader went against a field.

The next table counts the verdicts by class.

What the 25 share. In most of them the fleet's two readers counted concepts under a theme whose own must_not_show or discriminator names a sibling. Examples: defence calls under T3-002 instead of T3-005; a homeland flag under T3-002 or T3-038 instead of T3-065; another room's chat under T3-014 instead of T3-153; neighbours' requests under T3-024 instead of T3-039; a joint front under T3-011 instead of T3-150; plans and corrections under T3-038 instead of T3-070 or T3-004; a rival's art recoloured under T3-006 instead of T3-068. Two readers agreeing on such an item is a shared habit, not the scheme deciding. The settled line inherited it, because classes 1 and 2 stood without adjudication.

AprilKnights/t01 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-002 (calling members in to place). Three of four fresh readings add T3-016 (explaining what the canvas is): arm 1 reading 2 and both arm 2 readings. Arm 2 reading 1 also adds T3-171 (spreading a faction's colour). The T3-016 addition rests on c0001 ("/r/place is a, well, place where you can post a square"), which passes T3-016's must_show ("what r/place is") and which no call carries; the discriminator between the two asks exactly that. T3-171 rests on "help spread the red" and the red corner, which are also calls to place. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. Rule 0 makes one placement the default and allows a second "only where one cannot carry the material"; the fleet kept to one, and three fresh readers judged that T3-002 cannot carry the explanation.

calgaryflames/t15 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-028 (running scripts for the work) and T3-014 (moving planning into a chat). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings place T3-028 alone and list T3-014 under also_present. T3-014 stands on three concepts of its own (c0145, c0229, c0233: a Discord made, its link offered, script troubleshooting moved there). Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. Arm 2 kept the single placement and recorded the second theme under also_present, a use rule 0 gives only to bags of more than three themes. The settled line's two placements stand.

canucks/t12 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-048 (reacting to official April Fools). Three fresh readings place T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk): arm 1 reading 2 and both arm 2 readings. The two concepts enjoy the Sedins pranking Troy Stecher. Neither says April Fools; the fleet's whys call it "an official team April Fools joke". T3-048's must_show needs "an April Fools joke made by the maker the sub is about", and T3-017's needs talk "with no ... April Fools joke as its point". Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. The two B3 readers took a prank in the window as the club's April Fools joke, which the words do not show; on the words, T3-017's gate is met.

canucks/t16 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-150 (forming alliances between rooms). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings add T3-006 (calling to deface rivals' work) on c0074 ("throw a few blue pixels on waldo to try and scare them off") and T3-084 (asking other rooms for help) on c0079 ("come help a team ... keep our logo on the board"). Each concept passes the added theme's must_show, and each is one concept. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. Arm 2 placed three themes on single concepts; the fleet and arm 1 kept the single placement.

cfb/t01 (class 1, a bag). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-038 (building and reporting the mark), with nine more themes under also_present. Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings make T3-033 (proposing the room's mark) the primary and list T3-038 under also_present. The discriminator between the two counts concepts. The settled line gives T3-033 five, and puts the joke proposals ("24-21 maybe?", "Ohio State lost to Clemson 31-0", "Shirtless Charlie Weis and Bret Bielema") under T3-031 (playing the room's in-jokes). Read as proposals, which T3-033's must_show allows ("slogans and symbols proposed as the room's mark included"), they give T3-033 the larger share. Verdict: the scheme does not decide. A joke offered as the room's mark meets both T3-033's and T3-031's gates, and the count rule then swings the primary of a bag.

crystalclear/t01 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-033 (proposing the room's mark). All four fresh readings add T3-020 (choosing a canvas spot), on c0003 ("I found a good place here") and c0004 ("the top left black border"). Both arm 2 readings also add T3-004 (settling the mark's design) on the size and the preview, and arm 2 reading 2 drops T3-033. T3-020's must_show ("free space found ... a location announced") takes c0003 and c0004, which the settled line leaves uncarried. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. No field contradicts the fleet's single placement, but all four fresh readings judged that T3-033 cannot carry where the mark goes, the clearest such signal among the class 1 items. Arm 2 reading 2's drop of T3-033 goes against c0001 ("Lets get CLC on /r/place!").

danganronpa/t01 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-001 (staging April Fools fake news). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 agrees; arm 1 reading 2 and arm 2 reading 1 place T3-031 (playing the room's in-jokes); arm 2 reading 2 places T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk). The three concepts answer an insult with "(april fools)" and stock sexual replies. No fake posted as true is in the words (T3-001's gate). No canvas is in them (T3-031's gate). T3-017's must_not_show excludes "April Fools jokes". Verdict: the scheme does not decide. This is the defect already listed for stage C1: T3-017's and T3-001's discriminators against T3-031's canvas condition.

de/t01 (class 1, a bag). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-070 (sharing coordinates, templates and how-to), with T3-002, T3-062 and T3-038 under also_present. Three fresh readings agree. Arm 1 reading 1 places T3-002 (calling members in to place) as a second theme. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. With four themes at three concepts or more, rule 0's bag clause places one and names the rest under also_present; one reader placed two.

de/t05 (class 1, a bag). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-010 (settling borders with neighbours), with eight more themes under also_present, among them T3-149 (agreeing truces with rival rooms) on four concepts. Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings make T3-149 the primary and list T3-010 under also_present. The discriminator asks whether the deal "end[s] or forestall[s] a fight between rooms in contact". Much of the France and Germany talk does: "you guys Blitzkrieg us" (c0154), "please stop trying to swallow our flag" (c0134), "STOP WAR" (c0179), "a new europe flag inbetween to keep peace" (c0139). The settled line counts c0134 and c0139 under T3-010. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, on the primary of a bag. The two B3 readers and my B1 grouping read the French border as lines settled "where no fight began"; on the discriminator's words those concepts are T3-149's, and the count between the two themes is then close.

drugs/t08 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-001 (staging April Fools fake news). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings place T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk). The one concept is a writing prompt: LSD says "April Fools!" and turns into another drug; "What did LSD turn into?" Nothing is posted as true, which T3-001's must_show needs, and T3-017's must_not_show excludes "April Fools jokes". Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. The fleet placed T3-001 on April Fools play that is no fake (one B3 reader wrote "arguable because it is a prompt rather than a claim"). No theme's gate takes the concept; boundaries.md rules such play unresolved on T3-001's must_show, so an adjudication would have left this item unresolved.

edmontonoilers/t03 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-002 (calling members in to place), on all eighteen concepts. Arm 1 reading 1 agrees. Arm 1 reading 2 and arm 2 reading 1 add T3-005 (defending the work against attackers); arm 2 reading 1 also adds T3-016 (explaining what the canvas is); arm 2 reading 2 lists both under also_present. The discriminator between T3-002 and T3-005 asks whether "the call [is] to build or finish (T3-002), or to defend against an attack under way (T3-005)". Four concepts call for defence: "we've come under attack from the void. We need reinforcements" (c0088), "GO DEFEND THE LOGO" (c0126), and c0030 and c0062 on the oil drop being wrecked. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. The settled line counts those four under T3-002, and the discriminator sends them to T3-005.

falcons/t01 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-006 (calling to deface rivals' work). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings add T3-068 (converting a neighbour's art) on c0083 ("help turn the 3-28 thing into an 18-1 thing"). The settled line counts c0083 under T3-006, whose must_not_show names "another's art turned into the room's own sign (T3-068)". Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, on one concept. The second placement arm 2 made is licensed by that field.

gorillaz/t10 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-004 (settling the mark's design). Three fresh readings agree. Arm 2 reading 1 adds T3-152 (announcing what the chat decided) on c0056 ("The Discord server's plan for Noodle has been changed") and T3-074 (working around the timer) on the mobile trouble of c0106 and c0107. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. One reader placed two further themes, each on concepts of its own; c0056 is also a design change, which the settled line counts under T3-004.

homelab/t08 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-073 (reporting how the work fared). All four fresh readings place T3-068 (converting a neighbour's art): arm 1 alone, arm 2 with T3-073 and T3-029 (mourning the lost work). The room wrote "homelab" over Homestuck's logo: "Found a logo that said 'Homestuck' * Decided to change to 'Homelab'" (c0046), "Done, now says homelab" (c0036). T3-068's must_show names "a logo rewritten with the room's letters". The fleet's whys set the item apart as "reporting how it fared rather than doing the conversion". Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Neither T3-068's nor T3-073's fields separate telling a conversion from doing it, and the conversion is the room's own work. Arm 2's T3-029 rests on "damn it. we lost" (c0054) and the unfinished logo (c0053).

indonesia/t03 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-005 (defending the work against attackers), T3-021 (watching and repairing the work) and T3-141 (covering the night shift). Both arm 1 readings place T3-005 and T3-141. Both arm 2 readings place T3-005 alone and list T3-141 under also_present. All four drop T3-021. The settled line's T3-021 rests on c0017 (tidying the flag), c0096 (clearing stray tiles) and c0051 ("defend it guys its falling apart"); T3-021's must_not_show sends "an attack fought as such" to T3-005, which takes c0051. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. T3-021 still stands on two concepts of its own; the fresh readers judged that two placements carry the material, and arm 2 kept to one.

japan/t11 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-047 (making up with another sub). Three fresh readings add T3-011 (helping another room's work) on c0084 ("I'm also adding pixels to you guys") and c0087 ("I'll tell ubc members to help you guys out!"), which the settled line leaves uncarried. Arm 1 reading 2 places T3-170 (mistaking friendly work for vandalism) instead of T3-047: r/Tokyo took UBC's pixels for "a coordinated attack" and then corrected itself. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently, for T3-011. The T3-170 reading shows an undecided boundary: neither T3-047's nor T3-170's must_not_show names the other, and a mistaken accusation withdrawn with apology meets both gates.

kingdomhearts/t17 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-020 (choosing a canvas spot). Arm 1 reading 1 and both arm 2 readings place T3-038 (building and reporting the mark). The one concept is "started inside the Linux penguin!" T3-038's must_show names "started"; T3-020's names "a location announced ... before or while building". Verdict: the scheme does not decide. The concept meets both gates, and no discriminator joins T3-020 and T3-038.

landry/t05 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-052 (remarking on neighbouring pictures). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings place T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk). The one concept is "Well i'm going to need to head to an emergency eyewash station soon", said of the Madoka Magica image the label names. T3-052 needs "pictures around the room's mark"; the words do not say where the image is, and the coder's note calls it "the unseen image". Verdict: the scheme does not decide on these words. Whether the image is on the canvas next to the room's mark rests on the label.

metroid/t16 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-031 (playing the room's in-jokes). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings place T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk). The two concepts are "Have you ever heard the Tragedy of Old Bird the Wise?" and "Not too sure I have", with no canvas in them. T3-031's must_show needs humour "carried into canvas talk"; T3-017's discriminator allows the in-joke "carried into the canvas talk or the day". Verdict: the scheme does not decide. This is the listed defect for stage C1: the T3-017 and T3-031 discriminators disagree on T3-031's canvas condition.

mindcrack/t03 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-002 (calling members in to place). Three fresh readings agree. Arm 2 reading 2 adds T3-062 (recruiting kindred subs to help) on c0036 ("I've solicited Justin's stream to help") and c0068 ("We are getting help from the Hermitcraft discord"), and T3-152 (announcing what the chat decided) on c0016 (the FLOB Discord's plan). These concepts are not in the settled line's support. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. One reader took the exception for help drawn from other communities, which T3-002's discriminator against T3-062 sends to T3-062.

qotsa/t04 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-038 (building and reporting the mark). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings add T3-033 (proposing the room's mark) on c0014 ("I volunteer this, 37 x 37") and T3-070 (sharing coordinates, templates and how-to) on c0020 ("focus on the red first, then ... the black"). Each added theme has one concept of its own. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently.

rust/t03 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-031 (playing the room's in-jokes). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings add T3-064 (spreading the room's joke elsewhere); arm 2 reading 2 also adds T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk). The T3-064 concepts joke about taking the Rust gospel to Linus, RMS, the FSF and the GCC list; none takes it there. T3-064's must_show needs the joke "taken by members into another sub or site". T3-017's must_not_show names T3-031, and c0089 ("Is it rewritten in Rust yet?") answers the r/place proposal. Verdict: the fresh readings miss a field. The settled line holds.

samuraijack/t13 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk). Three fresh readings agree. Arm 1 reading 1 places T3-048 (reacting to official April Fools). The one concept reassures a distressed viewer ("Never be worried or ashamed about the things that get you through the day") and does not talk about the joke. T3-048's must_show needs talk about the maker's April Fools joke. Verdict: the fresh reading misses a field. The settled line holds.

southafrica/t13 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-009 (celebrating the finished work). All four fresh readings make T3-105 (saving screenshots and timelapses) the primary. Three add T3-009, and both arm 2 readings add T3-117 (marking the canvas's end) on c0138 ("Sigh, all over way too soon"). T3-105's must_show ("timelapses ... posted as records") takes c0169 and c0173 (the timelapse posted and linked), c0174 (where to look in it) and c0170 ("that's some awesome sauce", said of the timelapse). The settled line counts c0170 under T3-009, which leaves T3-009 two concepts (c0139, c0140). Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, on the primary. The fleet led with the congratulations; the timelapse concepts are more, and T3-105's gate takes them.

UPenn/t01 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-002 (calling members in to place). Three fresh readings agree. Arm 2 reading 2 places T3-038 (building and reporting the mark) first, on c0007 ("I'm working on it!"), then T3-002. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. With one concept for each theme, the count in the discriminator between them does not decide which leads; the settled line counts c0007 under T3-002.

Villanova/t05 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-009 (celebrating the finished work). Three fresh readings agree. Arm 2 reading 2 adds T3-105 (saving screenshots and timelapses) on c0015 ("More Pictures" of the completed place). Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. T3-009's must_show includes "a final image posted as done", and one reader judged the extra pictures a record of their own.

vim/t02 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-002 (calling members in to place). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings add T3-028 (running scripts for the work) on c0014 (a reddit-placebot repository). Arm 2 reading 1 also adds T3-021 (watching and repairing the work) on the maintenance concepts, and arm 2 reading 2 adds T3-170 (mistaking friendly work for vandalism) on c0013 ("Not being vandalized, it's a coordinated effort to move it down 3px"). Each concept passes the added theme's gate and is not in the settled line's support. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently.

yuyuyu/t04 (class 1). The fleet, my B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-151 (bartering help with neighbours). Both arm 1 readings agree. Both arm 2 readings add T3-194 (acting as envoys between rooms) on c0016 ("AN ENVOY FROM r/swissneutralityzone !"), which T3-194's must_show names ("a representative arriving in another room's thread"). Verdict: rule 0 applied differently, on one concept.

49ers/t06 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-005 (defending the work against attackers). My B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-005 and T3-021 (watching and repairing the work). Three fresh readings place both, as the settled line does: both arm 1 readings and arm 2 reading 2. Arm 2 reading 1 adds T3-059 (urging others to give up) on c0066 ("Starting to look like a lost cause"), words T3-059's must_show quotes. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently, in one reading. Three of four fresh readings support the B1 theme the fleet left out ("I'm keeping watch ... one pixel at a time", "fix it up").

AmericanFlaginPlace/t03 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-038 (building and reporting the mark). My B1 grouping and the settled line hold T3-038, T3-065 (building the homeland's flag) and T3-103 (dividing the picture among teams). All four fresh readings place T3-065: arm 1 with T3-038, arm 2 reading 1 alone, arm 2 reading 2 with T3-103 on c0041 ("Team Field - We will take care of the blue field"). T3-065's must_show takes the flag of the room's own land "built as the room's mark ... Announcements that the flag has begun or is up". Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. The two B3 readers placed the American flag as a mark of any kind; the B1 theme they left out is the one every fresh reader placed.

AprilKnights/t08 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-038 (building and reporting the mark). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-022 (relocating after losing the spot) and T3-029 (mourning the lost work). All four fresh readings place T3-038; arm 2 reading 1 adds T3-069 (concentrating effort on fewer pieces) on c0067 ("we have transfered to defending the button"). No reading places T3-022 or T3-029. T3-029 has one concept of its own (c0054, "it's completely gone"). T3-022 has none: nothing is moved or restarted elsewhere after a loss. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. The class 2 rule kept two themes that no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed, and the settled line places them without concepts.

asexuality/t06 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-164 (feeling supported through the canvas). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-009 (celebrating the finished work) and T3-057 (remaking canvas art elsewhere). Both arm 1 readings place T3-164 and T3-009. Arm 2 reading 1 places T3-164 and lists T3-009 under also_present. Arm 2 reading 2 places all three, as the settled line does. Pride concepts carry T3-009: "I'm proud of us" (c0084), "pretty happy with our progress" (c0007). The settled line counts both under T3-164, whose must_not_show names "the work celebrated (T3-009)". T3-057 rests on one concept, the cross-stitch of the flag (c0042). Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, for T3-009. Every fresh reading places or lists the B1 theme the fleet left out. T3-057 has one concept, and one fresh reading places it.

bangtan/t11 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-011 (helping another room's work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-150 (forming alliances between rooms). All four fresh readings place T3-011 alone. T3-150's must_show needs an alliance "for defence or a fight". Its one candidate concept is "Would BTS like to join up with r/Ireland in the future?" (c0057), which names neither. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. No reader of the fleet or of either arm placed T3-150, and its gate is not met.

belgium/t08 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-005 (defending the work against attackers). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-084 (asking other rooms for help). Three fresh readings add T3-062 (recruiting kindred subs to help) instead: arm 1 reading 1 and both arm 2 readings. The help concepts are "ask some help from other european subs" (c0053) and "a thread on /europe where we can gather strength from our allies" (c0054). The discriminator between the siblings asks whether "another sub's membership [is] asked for hands (T3-062), or another canvas group asked, as a group (T3-084)". A thread opened in another sub is T3-062's own example. The settled line counts c0053 to c0055 under T3-005. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme, where three fresh readers place its sibling. Arm 2 reading 2's T3-076 (reining in the room's attackers) rests on "Leave the Romanians be" (c0036, c0043).

calgaryflames/t03 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-002 (calling members in to place). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-005 (defending the work against attackers) and T3-070 (sharing coordinates, templates and how-to). Arm 1 reading 1 places T3-002 and T3-005; arm 1 reading 2 places T3-002 alone. Both arm 2 readings make T3-005 the primary and list T3-002 and T3-070 under also_present. Many concepts are alarms: "WERE DYING!! SAVE THE C OF RED" (c0031), "we are being assailed by blue pricks" (c0116), "We're under invasion by Scotland and England" (c0218), "Alberta is being attacked!" (c0279). The discriminator sends a call "to defend against an attack under way" to T3-005. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. The two B3 readers folded the defence calls into T3-002. Three fresh readings place the B1 theme that holds them, and two list my B1's T3-070 (coordinates c0111, c0183, c0193).

catalunya/t07 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-009 (celebrating the finished work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-154 (claiming victory over rival rooms). All four fresh readings place T3-009 alone. T3-154 rests on one concept: "We were there first. The victory feels good btw." (c0068). Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. It stands on one concept, and no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed it.

chicubs/t04 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-021 (watching and repairing the work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-042 (choosing upkeep over expansion) and T3-141 (covering the night shift). Arm 1 reading 1 places T3-021 and T3-005 (defending the work against attackers). Arm 1 reading 2 places T3-021, T3-042 and T3-005. Both arm 2 readings place T3-021 and list T3-003, T3-005, T3-042 and T3-141 under also_present. T3-042 has three concepts of its own (c0045, c0075, c0213: hold the logo before growing it). T3-141 has three (c0082, c0112, c0197: staying up, the hand-off to the Chicago night shift). T3-005 has several ("It's currently under assault. I'm on it.", "we held the line"). Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. With four or five themes at three concepts each, rule 0's bag clause places one and lists the rest, as arm 2 did. The settled line places three with concepts for one. The fresh readers support my B1 themes as present.

ChronoTrigger/t04 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-010 (settling borders with neighbours). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-061 (pushing into a neighbour's space) and T3-150 (forming alliances between rooms). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 T3-010; arm 1 reading 2 T3-010 and T3-024 (refusing to cover others' work); both arm 2 readings T3-010, with T3-195 under also_present. T3-061 has two concepts that pass its gate ("wage war with that yellow thing ... for space", c0092; "wage war with the shiny Lucario", c0093), and T3-150 has two (an alliance proposed, c0055; "will also try to defend it from vandals", c0061). Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. Each has two concepts of its own, but no reader of the fleet or of either arm took rule 0's exception for them.

clashroyale/t08 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-038 (building and reporting the mark). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-005 (defending the work against attackers) and T3-021 (watching and repairing the work). Both arm 1 readings place T3-038 and T3-005. Both arm 2 readings place T3-038 alone. T3-005 rests on "We've since been overrun! ... we must defend her!" (c0382) and "Save our princess" (c0383). No reading places T3-021. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently, for T3-005: the fresh readers split as the fleet and my B1 grouping did. For T3-021, the settled line keeps a B1 theme no reader placed.

daftpunk/t03 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-010 (settling borders with neighbours). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-020 (choosing a canvas spot) and T3-039 (yielding space when asked). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 and arm 2 reading 2 place T3-010; arm 1 reading 2 places T3-020 alone; arm 2 reading 1 places T3-010 and lists T3-020 under also_present. No reading places T3-039, though "I personally think we should let them have it" (c0048), said of the area r/straya asked for, meets its gate; the settled line counts c0048 under T3-010. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. Two fresh readings support T3-020; T3-039 rests on a concept the settled line gives to T3-010.

dallasstars/t09 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-002 (calling members in to place). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-017 (carrying on ordinary sub talk). All four fresh readings place T3-002 alone. T3-017 rests on one concept, the game-thread summary "Depression. Confusion. Some happiness when we see goals like that" (c0074). Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. It stands on one concept, and no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed it.

FaroeIslands/t01 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-022 (relocating after losing the spot). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-026 (announcing the mark is up) and T3-065 (building the homeland's flag). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 T3-022; arm 1 reading 2 T3-065 alone; both arm 2 readings T3-065 then T3-022. The room is named for the Faroes and builds the Faroese flag ("Could we as a community do a Faroe flag", c0001). T3-065's discriminator against T3-026 says "a flag built in a room named for a land is that land's flag unless its concepts name another", and sends announcements that the flag is up to T3-065 as well. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Three fresh readings place the B1 theme the fleet left out. No reading places T3-026, whose concepts the same discriminator gives to T3-065.

Fez/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-014 (moving planning into a chat). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-153 (meeting other rooms in chat). Arm 1 reading 1 places both, as the settled line does; arm 1 reading 2 places T3-014 alone. Both arm 2 readings place T3-014, T3-153 and T3-152 (announcing what the chat decided). The concepts on Denmark's Discord ("invite us on your discord", c0064; "I will pass on your template in our discord!", c0084) are contact with another room through a chat. T3-014's must_not_show sends "talking with other rooms in their chats" to T3-153, yet the settled line counts both under T3-014. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Three fresh readings place the B1 theme those concepts carry. Arm 2's T3-152 rests on "Danes in discord coordinating seem to be in on restoring your art" (c0043).

floridagators/t09 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-014 (moving planning into a chat). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-152 (announcing what the chat decided) and T3-153 (meeting other rooms in chat). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 T3-014; arm 1 reading 2 T3-014 and T3-152; both arm 2 readings T3-014, T3-152 and T3-056 (making joint marks with others). "The beautiful bastards on the discord servers have planned out the following Albert" (c0067) reports the chat's plan in the thread; T3-014's must_not_show sends that to T3-152, yet the settled line counts it under T3-014. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, for T3-152, which three fresh readings place. For T3-153, the one concept ("On discord we're organizing an alliance with the Smash guys", c0124) is read by arm 2 as the joint picture it plans (T3-056).

floridagators/t10 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-043 (crediting who made the work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-009 (celebrating the finished work) and T3-159 (rewarding helpers with prizes). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 T3-043 and T3-009; arm 1 reading 2 T3-043; both arm 2 readings T3-009, T3-043 and T3-156 (adopting the mark as emblem). "It's over, and we finished strong with an untainted UF logo!! Well done" (c0125) and "Small victories" (c0027) celebrate with no one credited, which T3-043's must_not_show sends to T3-009. The flair for "the r/place defenders" (c0130, c0131) meets T3-156's "flair ... from the work" and my B1's T3-159 ("mock medals"). Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, for T3-009, which three fresh readings place. For the flair, the scheme does not decide between T3-156 and T3-159.

furry_irl/t23 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-054 (carrying work to new canvases). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-037 (arguing the canvas's worth). All four fresh readings place T3-054 alone. T3-037's must_show weighs "the canvas ... as a whole"; the concepts argue whether PlaceTwo is "a carbon copy of place" (c0164), which is talk about a later canvas, T3-054's gate. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. Its gate is not met, and no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed it.

GabrielDropout/t01 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-002 (calling members in to place). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-011 (helping another room's work) and T3-014 (moving planning into a chat). Both arm 1 readings place T3-002 alone. Both arm 2 readings place T3-002, T3-151 (bartering help with neighbours) and T3-014. "We've acquiesced our territory to your r/Tenma banner, so can you help us fight against r/AceAttorney?" (c0044) asks help in return for ground given, T3-151's gate; T3-011's must_not_show names "help traded for help (T3-151)", and the settled line counts c0044 under T3-002, whose must_not_show names calls to "another canvas room as a room". Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme T3-011, where arm 2 places the sibling the fields name. T3-014 rests on one concept ("join the Discord!", c0056), which arm 2 places.

kuwait/t01 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-065 (building the homeland's flag). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-070 (sharing coordinates, templates and how-to). All four fresh readings place T3-065 alone. T3-070 rests on the coordinates and the vertical plan (c0004, c0015); T3-065's must_show also takes "its spot". Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. No reader of the fleet or of either arm placed it.

leafs/t08 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-001 (staging April Fools fake news) and T3-032 (objecting to April Fools posts). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-095 (testing others' April Fools claims). Three fresh readings place the fleet's two; arm 2 reading 1 places all three, as the settled line does. T3-095 has concepts of its own: members ask whether NHL news is a joke ("Inb4 April Fools and Werenski gets it", c0089; c0103; "Is it still April Fool's over there?", c0126). The discriminator sends claims from "the news" to T3-095. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. One fresh reading took the exception my B1 grouping took; three kept to two placements.

lego/t13 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-021 (watching and repairing the work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-005 (defending the work against attackers). Three fresh readings place T3-021; arm 2 reading 2 places both, as the settled line does. T3-005 rests on one concept, "We mustn't allow the void to take over Lego" (c0192). Verdict: rule 0 applied differently, on one concept.

loltyler1/t03 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-006 (calling to deface rivals' work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-068 (converting a neighbour's art) and T3-154 (claiming victory over rival rooms). All four fresh readings place T3-006 alone; arm 2 reading 1 lists T3-061 under also_present. T3-068 has concepts of its own ("write #freetyler1 when we black out OSU", c0038; c0084; "REPLACE OSU WITH KIRBY", c0122), and T3-154 has two ("thank you for destroying OSU", c0039; "WE DID IT BOYZ", c0150). Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. Each passes its gate on concepts of its own, but no reader of the fleet or of either arm took rule 0's exception for them.

marvel/t04 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-020 (choosing a canvas spot). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-031 (playing the room's in-jokes) and T3-123 (refusing to give up space). Three fresh readings place T3-020 alone. Arm 2 reading 1 adds T3-002 (calling members in to place) on the calls for help and T3-136 (doubting the room's strength) on "We'll need a lot more people for this invasion" (c0041). T3-031 rests on "because We Are Groot!" (c0039) and "you got me at 'Groot'" (c0040). T3-123 rests on r/Doormonster's "NOPE ... Go build in the void below us" (c0049), a neighbour's refusal, which T3-123's gate does not take as the room's own. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. No reader placed either, and one rests on another room's act.

mcgill/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-014 (moving planning into a chat). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-070 (sharing coordinates, templates and how-to) and T3-151 (bartering help with neighbours). Both arm 1 readings place T3-014 alone. Both arm 2 readings place T3-153 (meeting other rooms in chat) and T3-067 (trading away another room's work); arm 2 reading 2 adds T3-070. "If you help me get rid of them now, you could take up that whole space" (c0007) offers up a third room's work, which T3-151's must_not_show sends to T3-067. "Join us on the discord to strategize!" (c0008) is said to an ally, which T3-014's must_not_show sends to T3-153. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, and my B1 grouping's T3-151 is the wrong sibling. Arm 2's placements follow both fields.

miraculousladybug/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-045 (arguing who was there first). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-010 (settling borders with neighbours). All four fresh readings place T3-045 alone. The exchange argues priority ("We were building on it first", c0006) and offers to help the other side find another spot (c0007); no line or space is agreed, which T3-010's gate needs. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. Its gate is not met, and no reader of the fleet or of either arm placed it.

monstercat/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-001 (staging April Fools fake news). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-095 (testing others' April Fools claims). Arm 1 reading 1 places both, as the settled line does; the other three place T3-001 alone. T3-095 rests on "Can't find this on his twitter. Either he deleted it or this is fake" (c0008) and c0153. The discriminator turns on whether a member of this room staged the claim, and the words do not say who posted the fake release. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. One fresh reading took the exception my B1 grouping took, on a concept whose source the item leaves open.

monsterhunter/t10 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-015 (routing canvas posts into megathreads). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-063 (removing canvas posts by rule). Both arm 1 readings place T3-015 alone. Both arm 2 readings add T3-184 (pausing the sub's usual events) on "The /r/place thing is taking the sticky posts" (c0160), the question sticky displaced. The removals ("This thread has been removed as we are trying to keep all r/place discussion to" the sticky, c0153, c0155) point to the gathering thread, which the discriminator sends to T3-015. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme, whose discriminator gives its concepts to T3-015. No reader placed it.

nVade/t07 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-117 (marking the canvas's end). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-009 (celebrating the finished work) and T3-043 (crediting who made the work). Both arm 1 readings place T3-117 alone. Arm 2 reading 1 places all three, as the settled line does; arm 2 reading 2 places T3-117 and T3-009. T3-009 rests on "I'm very proud of everyone here" (c0087) and "some of our invaders actually survived thankfully" (c0084); T3-043 rests on "we can point to our green guys and say 'I did that'" (c0089). Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. Arm 2 took the exception for my B1 themes, and arm 1 kept the fleet's single placement.

ockytop/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-006 (calling to deface rivals' work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-055 (reshaping the mark against tampering) and T3-087 (tracing who changed the work). Both arm 1 readings place T3-006 alone. Arm 2 reading 1 places T3-068 (converting a neighbour's art), T3-006 and T3-076 (reining in the room's attackers); arm 2 reading 2 places T3-068 and T3-076. The raids lay the room's orange-and-white checkerboard over rivals' work: "THE CHECKERBOARDING OF FLORIDA'S UF WILL BEGIN AT 8PM" (c0058), "give them a beautiful orange and white checkerboard to wake up to" (c0030). T3-006's must_not_show sends "another's art turned into the room's own sign" to T3-068, and the settled line counts both under T3-006. "Maybe we should cancel the attack?" (c0060) and "We should stop the Florida attack" (c0061) call an attack off, T3-076's gate. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. My B1 themes have concepts of their own (a checkerboard border around the T, c0007 and c0008; "/r/TheWhiteVoid is attacking us", c0101), but no fresh reading placed them.

onepunchman/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-136 (doubting the room's strength). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-059 (urging others to give up) and T3-075 (objecting to the canvas flood). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 T3-037 (arguing the canvas's worth) and T3-075; arm 1 reading 2 T3-136; both arm 2 readings T3-075 alone. "Stop spamming" (c0058), "Let us be lazy jerk offs in peace!" (c0057) and "This isnt the first time this was posted" (c0059) object to the posts, T3-075's gate. The settled line counts c0057 and c0058 under T3-136, whose gate is doubt that the room can make the work. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Three fresh readings place the B1 theme those concepts carry. No reading places T3-059.

placesnek/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-024 (refusing to cover others' work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-039 (yielding space when asked). Both arm 1 readings place T3-024 alone. Both arm 2 readings place T3-010 (settling borders with neighbours), T3-024 and T3-039. Most concepts are neighbours' requests ("Please don't damage the AMD logo", c0010; "we ... would appreciate if you led your snek around our logo", c0045; "Please do Not pass through the SU sub section", c0052), and the room answers them ("We can curve around the corner of the AMD logo", c0096). T3-024's must_not_show sends "moving because a neighbour asked" to T3-039, yet four of the five concepts the settled line counts under T3-024 are requests. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Arm 2 places the B1 theme the requests carry. Its T3-010 rests on "we'll keep it in the border you're free to go downward" (c0013).

placestart/t01 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-038 (building and reporting the mark). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-021 (watching and repairing the work). Three fresh readings add T3-004 (settling the mark's design); arm 2 reading 1 also adds T3-021; arm 2 reading 2 lists T3-004 under also_present. The corrections ("The title bar for the Van Gogh painting is wrong", c0325; "it needs two pixels of gray", c0354; UTC for the clock, c0355) are "corrections to make the placed work match the design", T3-004's gate. The discriminator sends them there, and the settled line counts c0325 and c0354 under T3-038. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Three fresh readings place a theme neither the fleet nor my B1 grouping placed; one places my B1's T3-021.

puzzleanddragons/t04 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-011 (helping another room's work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-014 (moving planning into a chat) and T3-150 (forming alliances between rooms). All four fresh readings place T3-150: arm 1 reading 1 with T3-014 and T3-011, as the settled line holds them; arm 1 reading 2 alone; both arm 2 readings with T3-153 (meeting other rooms in chat). "All of our groups need to band together and defend the Puerto Rican flag" (c0037) and "If we all band together now, we may be able to stop them" (c0132) are "rooms joining a front"; T3-011's must_not_show names "an alliance for joint defence (T3-150)", and the settled line counts both under T3-011. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Every fresh reading places the B1 theme. Arm 2 reads c0136, a neighbour sent to the room's Discord, as T3-153, the sibling T3-014's must_not_show names.

reddevils/t18 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-050 (trading taunts with rivals). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-155 (saluting rivals after the fight). All four fresh readings place T3-050 alone. T3-155 rests on half a concept: "Aye lad fair one, now fuck off yer rat bastard" (c0209) returns thanks only to insult. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. No reader of the fleet or of either arm placed it.

rush/t08 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-001 (staging April Fools fake news). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-095 (testing others' April Fools claims). All four fresh readings place T3-001 alone. The testing replies sit inside the room's own fakes ("I feel bamboozled", c0056; the moderator's "GUYS THIS WAS FAKE", c0057, on the fake Neil Peart AMA). T3-095's must_not_show sends those to T3-001 ("readers caught by them included"). Only c0055, on the Xanadu mash-up, tests a claim whose source the words leave open. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme, which its own must_not_show excludes for most of its concepts. No reader placed it.

scotland/t07 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-015 (routing canvas posts into megathreads) and T3-014 (moving planning into a chat). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-152 (announcing what the chat decided). Both arm 1 readings place the fleet's two. Both arm 2 readings place all three, as the settled line does. T3-152 rests on "no longer pasting over the NAT" (c0131), a Discord decision reported in the thread. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. Arm 2 took the third placement my B1 grouping took; arm 1 kept the fleet's two.

slovenia/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-065 (building the homeland's flag). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-002 (calling members in to place) and T3-068 (converting a neighbour's art). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 T3-065 and T3-113 (drawing national emblems); arm 1 reading 2 T3-065; arm 2 reading 1 T3-065, with T3-113 under also_present; arm 2 reading 2 T3-065, T3-113 and T3-068. The coat of arms carries T3-113, whose must_show names "a coat of arms": "Narejimo Grb" (c0021), "Manjka grb" (c0022), "Uspel je grb!" (c0024). T3-065's must_not_show sends "emblems ... drawn beside or inside the flag" to T3-113, yet the settled line counts c0022 and c0024 under T3-065. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Three fresh readings place or list a theme neither the fleet nor my B1 grouping placed. My B1's T3-002 is excluded by T3-002's own must_not_show ("the national flag as the room's mark carries T3-065"). My B1's T3-068 rests on c0014 ("convert the slovakian flag ... to the slovenian flag"), which one fresh reading places.

starcitizen/t06 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-031 (playing the room's in-jokes). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-033 (proposing the room's mark). Three fresh readings place both, as the settled line does; arm 1 reading 2 places T3-031 alone. T3-033 rests on one concept, "Can we make a giant" GIB 3.0 NAO drawing (c0101). Verdict: rule 0 applied differently. Three of four fresh readings took the exception my B1 grouping took, on one concept.

tampabaylightning/t13 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-004 (settling the mark's design). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-049 (complaining the calls are scattered). All four fresh readings lead with T3-041 (extending the room's work); both arm 2 readings add T3-049, and arm 2 reading 2 adds T3-004. "I'm working on adding Tampa Bay up top" (c0103) and "we have rewritten Tampa Bay at the top of the logo ... expand it to be even better" (c0117) add to the mark. T3-004's must_not_show sends "a bigger or second piece" to T3-041, and the settled line counts both under T3-004. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Every fresh reading leads with a theme neither the fleet nor my B1 grouping placed. Arm 2 places my B1's T3-049 on c0105 ("now It's just gonna be blue without any coordination?") and c0120.

TheFarLeftSide/t13 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-005 (defending the work against attackers). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-086 (carrying in the sub's quarrel) and T3-087 (tracing who changed the work). All four fresh readings place T3-005 alone; both arm 2 readings list T3-087 and T3-073 under also_present. T3-087 has concepts of its own that name who is behind the attacks ("it is the Italians who have encroached ... using scripts", c0292; "info about the bot are in a pinned post in their sub", c0323; "Bot linked with fakenews, TD and the all-right", c0344). Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. No fresh reading places them, though arm 2 records T3-087 as present.

TheHulk/t09 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-142 (making ethnic jokes about rivals). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-050 (trading taunts with rivals). All four fresh readings place T3-142 alone. All three concepts insult Croatians as a people ("little e-nazzies", c0038), which T3-050's must_not_show sends to T3-142. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme, which its own must_not_show excludes here. No reader placed it.

twitchplayspokemon/t03 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-038 (building and reporting the mark). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-022 (relocating after losing the spot) and T3-070 (sharing coordinates, templates and how-to). Every fresh reading places T3-070. Arm 1 reading 1 leads with it, adding T3-038 and T3-009 (celebrating the finished work); arm 1 reading 2 places the settled line's three; both arm 2 readings place T3-070 alone, with T3-009 under also_present. The plans for placers carry T3-070: "Go here and zoom in" with coordinates (c0035), "New heart plan" (c0129), "NEXT AND PROBABLY FINAL NEW PLAN" (c0134), "Revised current plan" (c0136). The discriminator sends "directions posted for placers to follow" to T3-070, yet the settled line counts c0035 and c0136 under T3-038. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption. Three fresh readings make my B1's T3-070 the primary.

uofmn/t09 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-028 (running scripts for the work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-014 (moving planning into a chat) and T3-087 (tracing who changed the work). Three fresh readings place T3-028 and T3-014; arm 1 reading 1 places T3-028 alone. T3-014 rests on one concept, "Should we start a Discord?" (c0072). T3-087 rests on "I think they have a bot" (c0080), which no reading places. Verdict: rule 0 applied differently, for T3-014. The settled line keeps T3-087, which no reader placed.

wales/t02 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-002 (calling members in to place). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-041 (extending the room's work) and T3-113 (drawing national emblems). Fresh: arm 1 reading 1 T3-002; arm 1 reading 2 T3-002 and T3-065 (building the homeland's flag); arm 2 reading 1 T3-065; arm 2 reading 2 T3-065, T3-113 and T3-169 (signing the sub's name). "Lets Make the welsh Flag on R/Place!" (c0003), "Lets Make A Bigger Flag!" (c0034) and c0012 and c0031 call for the flag of the room's land. T3-002's must_not_show says "the national flag as the room's mark carries T3-065", yet the settled line counts c0003 and c0034 under T3-002. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, and my B1 grouping shares it. Three fresh readings place T3-065, which neither placed. One reading places my B1's T3-113 on "Cymru" and "Yma O Hyd" (c0016, c0018).

wallstreetbets/t08 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-023 (running an April Fools takeover). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-095 (testing others' April Fools claims). Both arm 1 readings place T3-023 alone. Both arm 2 readings place both, as the settled line does. "Who fucked with the subreddit theme?" (c0064) and "Some mad secret tomfuckery going on with the css and subscribers" (c0058) work out what the change is, which the discriminator sends to T3-095. The settled line counts both under T3-023. Verdict: the fleet's shared assumption, on two concepts. Arm 2 places my B1's T3-095.

warframe/t11 (class 2, a bag). The fleet holds T3-010 (settling borders with neighbours). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-035 (asking a host for space) and T3-094 (disputing who approves a spot), with T3-151, T3-162 and T3-011 under also_present. Both arm 1 readings place T3-010 and T3-151 (bartering help with neighbours). Arm 2 reading 1 places T3-094 and lists T3-162, T3-151 and T3-011. Arm 2 reading 2 places T3-162 (vetting others' requests to build) and lists T3-151, T3-011 and T3-073. GreenLattice's permission and no-build zone run through the item: "very picky about what will be allowed" (c0229), "they decided to no more art in that area" (c0254), "The people who made /r/GreenLattice have no authority" (c0300). Verdict: the scheme does not decide the primary of this bag. T3-010, T3-094 and T3-162 each take several concepts, and their discriminators sort concepts, not items. The settled line places three themes where rule 0's bag clause places one.

witcher/t05 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-010 (settling borders with neighbours). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-046 (arguing whether covering is fair) and T3-050 (trading taunts with rivals). All four fresh readings place T3-010 alone. T3-046 has two concepts that pass its gate ("Your flag goes across the entire canvas. Come on, you need have some lenience", c0070; "It was an open online canvas for anybody to use", c0075), and T3-050 has two ("I'm gonna start vandalizing your whatever", c0068; "There are only 2 genders. got em", c0072). Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. Each passes its gate on concepts of its own, but no reader of the fleet or of either arm took rule 0's exception for them.

witcher/t08 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-009 (celebrating the finished work). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-043 (crediting who made the work) and T3-073 (reporting how the work fared). All four fresh readings place T3-009 alone. T3-043 rests on one concept ("We had a great little squad of people working tirelessly to defend the banner. Thanks for helping out!", c0103). T3-073 rests on two accounts of the defence (c0096, c0098), and both end in celebration ("What matters is we did it!"). Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 themes. Each rests on one or two concepts, and no reader placed them.

WPI/t05 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-005 (defending the work against attackers). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-087 (tracing who changed the work). All four fresh readings place T3-005 alone. The proof concepts name RPI as the attacker ("Proof: .../r/RPI/.../help_us_hijack_the_wpi_rplace", c0007; "Here's proof! We need to stop them!", c0049), T3-087's "naming the room ... responsible". Each also serves the call to defend. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. No reader of the fleet or of either arm placed it as a second theme.

xcom/t12 (class 2). The fleet holds T3-075 (objecting to the canvas flood). My B1 grouping and the settled line add T3-090 (opening a canvas sub). All four fresh readings place T3-075 alone. "Please make /r/xcomplace" (c0088) and "maybe somebody could start r/xcomplace" (c0094) ask for a canvas sub, which T3-090's gate takes ("asked for"). They are also the objection itself, and the settled line counts both under T3-075. Verdict: the settled line keeps my B1 theme. Its concepts are the objection's own, and no reader placed it.