diff --git a/docs/creative/04-prototype.md b/docs/creative/04-prototype.md index 6b775ed..b73076b 100644 --- a/docs/creative/04-prototype.md +++ b/docs/creative/04-prototype.md @@ -756,3 +756,79 @@ anchors (Film, AI Usage, Open line), two plain images (Cover, Process), alt text fallback copy, and the necessary verifier in `BrickerP/BrickerP` only. A new route, a dynamic service, standalone text-link rows, and product changes to Loop / Endless Second Ring / AI Usage remain out of scope. + +## 2026-08-10 — A Profile with Memory + +Status: **Step 4 approved by the user on 2026-08-10.** This section supersedes +the clickable-portal correction as the current next-loop direction. The shipped +five-spread Human Zine and its evidence remain a dated, inspectable baseline; +they are not rewritten or treated as the new architecture. + +### Approved architecture + +The Profile gets one free-form **current intrusion** and a durable +`experiments/` archive. The intrusion may change shape with the question; it is +not a fixed `CURRENT OBSESSION` card, reusable component, or issue template. +Clicking the intrusion opens the current issue at +`experiments/001-a-profile-with-memory/`. + +`PAST FIXATIONS` does not appear in the first issue. It becomes useful only when +a second issue exists and there is real past work to point to. There is no empty +archive theatre and no placeholder history. + +The archive is editorial, not scheduled infrastructure. Do not add a template, +publishing cadence, API, cron job, generator, dynamic service, or migration +layer. `experiments/README.md` is a small evolving index; each issue owns its +question and evidence in its own directory. + +### Approved first issue + +- **Issue:** `A PROFILE WITH MEMORY` +- **Question:** `HOW MANY PAST SELVES SHOULD A PROFILE REMEMBER?` +- **Portal:** the whole current-intrusion image links to + `experiments/001-a-profile-with-memory/`. +- **Evidence:** four real commits in `BrickerP/BrickerP` `main` ancestry, in + chronological order: + - `91a7a77` — recruiter-scan profile; + - `35aa305` — Loop / Ledger profile; + - `b130094` — Human Zine profile; + - `d71f9f3` — clickable visual portals. +- **Visual:** torn, deliberately misregistered profile fragments are visibly + stitched into one history. The composition should feel repaired and revised, + not like four matched cards or a clean timeline. + +The image-generation preview is mood and composition reference only. It is not +release evidence and must not be copied into the product as invented history. +The shipped intrusion and issue use evidence read from the four commits above; +any crop, label, or fragment must be traceable to those real Profile states. + +### Self-questioning + +#### Why reject a permanent `CURRENT OBSESSION` card? + +Because the first issue would prematurely harden an editorial experiment into a +component system. The current question should determine the form; the form must +not determine every future question. + +#### Why make memory the first issue? + +The Profile already has multiple materially different, verifiable selves on one +`main` ancestry line. That makes revision history the strongest available +subject, not a fabricated theme. + +#### Why omit `PAST FIXATIONS` now? + +With one issue, it would be an empty label or a duplicate link. The second issue +creates the first honest contrast between current and past. + +#### Why keep the system manual? + +The value is selection and interpretation, not publishing frequency. Automation +would add machinery before there is a repeated workflow to justify it. + +### Step 4 approval gate + +The user has approved the architecture, first issue, question, evidence chain, +and torn/misregistered/stitched-history direction. Step 5 is authorized only +within the five-file boundary recorded in the 2026-08-10 section of +`05-mvp-prompt.md`. diff --git a/docs/creative/05-mvp-prompt.md b/docs/creative/05-mvp-prompt.md index 7dccb17..d55a71d 100644 --- a/docs/creative/05-mvp-prompt.md +++ b/docs/creative/05-mvp-prompt.md @@ -234,3 +234,45 @@ rewrite an asset. merge/publication, read back the rendered GitHub Profile, verify all native destinations, and confirm the fixed paper and readable layout in light and dark themes before claiming the Human Zine live. + +## 2026-08-10 Step 5 override — A Profile with Memory + +Status: **implementation authorized by the user on 2026-08-10.** This section is +the sole active Step 5 source. It supersedes the seven-file clickable-portal +implementation above as the next change while retaining that shipped contract +as history. + +### Exact implementation boundary + +Implementation happens only in `BrickerP/BrickerP` and changes exactly these +five files: + +| File | Responsibility | +| --- | --- | +| `README.md` | Present one free-form current intrusion and wrap the whole image in one native relative link to `experiments/001-a-profile-with-memory/`. Do not add a fixed `CURRENT OBSESSION` card or `PAST FIXATIONS` in issue 001. | +| `assets/a-profile-with-memory.svg` | One static, pure-display intrusion for issue 001, using torn, misregistered, visibly stitched fragments grounded in the four approved Profile commits. | +| `experiments/README.md` | Keep the evolving experiment index and link issue 001. It is not a template, feed, schedule, or generated manifest. | +| `experiments/001-a-profile-with-memory/README.md` | Record `A PROFILE WITH MEMORY`, the question `HOW MANY PAST SELVES SHOULD A PROFILE REMEMBER?`, and the real evidence chain `91a7a77` → `35aa305` → `b130094` → `d71f9f3`. | +| `scripts/verify-profile.mjs` | Verify the README portal, issue path, one-SVG boundary, exact question and commit identifiers, and prohibited automation/template paths. It remains a verifier, never a generator. | + +No other README asset, product repository, runtime, or deployment mechanism is +in scope. Do not add a compatibility layer for the five-spread layout, a second +current-entry path, a template, publishing cadence, API, cron job, generator, or +dynamic service. `PAST FIXATIONS` is deferred until issue 002 creates a real +past/current distinction. + +### Evidence contract + +The product must derive its visible history from the four real commits on the +Profile repository's `main` ancestry: + +- `91a7a77faf8492d1aaedd975cca404dc3890657e`; +- `35aa3052a2765879a5c0973260f11042b81ca55e`; +- `b130094cb5f273bbb20cec5cff163eafb511f638`; +- `d71f9f3c92a1c615d6b49a59da9bf1f40ddfffb1`. + +The torn/misregistered/stitched treatment may edit scale, crop, overlap, and +registration, but it must not invent a Profile state, commit, sequence, or +receipt. The image-generation preview is mood/reference only and is neither a +release asset nor proof. The issue README names the evidence plainly enough for +a visitor to inspect it. diff --git a/docs/creative/06-dogfood.md b/docs/creative/06-dogfood.md index 9e69a43..a2aed93 100644 --- a/docs/creative/06-dogfood.md +++ b/docs/creative/06-dogfood.md @@ -168,3 +168,23 @@ call the Human Zine ready for participants until the exact remote Profile commit proves five spreads, three whole-image outer anchors, two plain images, keyboard focus, image-failure alt fallback, exact destinations, and no standalone action-link rows. + +## 2026-08-10 five-person feedback readback + +Five people saw the shipped Profile. The common reaction was positive, with a +recurring qualification that it felt slightly simple or sparse. This is useful +directional feedback: the visual portals work well enough to preserve as a +historical issue, while the next experiment needs a richer idea rather than more +decoration on the same layout. + +This was informal qualitative feedback, not the queued 90-second protocol. No +per-participant answers, evidence citations, task outcomes, or scored counts were +recorded. Therefore it does **not** satisfy the earlier `4/5` recall or `3/5` +specific-action thresholds, and it must not be reported as quantitative +acceptance. “Generally liked, but slightly simple” is the complete supported +claim. + +The feedback closes the need to keep waiting before choosing a next creative +question; it does not validate a permanent layout. The approved response is the +`A PROFILE WITH MEMORY` current intrusion and `experiments/` archive recorded in +Steps 4 and 5, not a fixed `CURRENT OBSESSION` card. diff --git a/docs/creative/07-next-loop.md b/docs/creative/07-next-loop.md index a52b95c..57d13f1 100644 --- a/docs/creative/07-next-loop.md +++ b/docs/creative/07-next-loop.md @@ -97,3 +97,47 @@ spread**—not additional prose and not shared branding across the works. These remain deferred backlog observations and must not displace the clickable portal recovery gate or the participant-recall test that follows it. + +## 2026-08-10 superseding next loop + +Status: **approved by the user.** The clickable visual portals shipped on +`BrickerP/BrickerP` `main` at `d71f9f3`, and five people subsequently gave +informal feedback. This section supersedes the current-next-knife and queued-test +ordering above while preserving both as historical context. + +The supported feedback is deliberately narrow: people generally liked the +Profile but found it slightly simple or sparse. Because the session was not the +documented 90-second protocol and did not capture participant-level scores, it +is not a formal quantitative pass and does not meet or falsify the old `4/5` and +`3/5` thresholds. + +### Approved opportunity + +Turn revision itself into the next subject. The Profile presents one free-form +current intrusion and keeps an evolving `experiments/` archive. It does not +install a permanent `CURRENT OBSESSION` card. `PAST FIXATIONS` first appears +with issue 002, when a genuinely past fixation exists. + +The first issue is **A PROFILE WITH MEMORY** and asks: + +> **HOW MANY PAST SELVES SHOULD A PROFILE REMEMBER?** + +Its visual language is torn, misregistered, and stitched history grounded in +four real Profile `main` ancestors: `91a7a77`, `35aa305`, `b130094`, and +`d71f9f3`. The complete current intrusion links to +`experiments/001-a-profile-with-memory/`. Image-generation output remains +mood/reference only; release material must use real evidence from those commits. + +### The one next knife + +Implement only the five-file Step 5 boundary: `README.md`, one +`assets/a-profile-with-memory.svg`, `experiments/README.md`, the issue README at +`experiments/001-a-profile-with-memory/README.md`, and +`scripts/verify-profile.mjs`. + +Do not add a template, issue schedule, API, cron job, generator, dynamic service, +compatibility layer, or second current-entry mechanism. The implementation is +complete only after remote CI verifies the pushed commit and the exact remote +README, SVG, archive index, issue, and portal destination are read back. That +remote implementation and verification are outside this documentation-only +update.