Room form B, the work behind the thread: the chat, the scripts and raiding: the form account

Written at D5a-37, 27 October 2026. The model is the version frozen at D3 (46384686d6173fdeb4c749667478c1363e675bc6b52bb6f4fdc211d387e68525). Form B is one of the six room forms of the cut J ruled at D4a-08 (room-forms-D4a08c.*); how every room reaches its form is in room-forms-allocation.md. It holds 141 of the 705 analysed rooms. 113 are defining rooms: rooms with 5 or more selected changes, which shaped the form. 23 are thin rooms (1 to 4 selected changes) and 5 are core rooms (no selected change), placed afterwards. Thin and core rooms weigh less: every share, signature, theme count, representative choice and split below is read on the 113 defining rooms, and the thin and core rooms are named in section 15.

Form B is the labelled mixture of the six-form cut. Its three signatures are each held by under half of its defining rooms. The principal investigator asked that its account come first among the forms in one respect: whether the chat, the scripts and raiding stand apart inside it. Section 14 answers. A room form is not a branch: it gathers rooms by the whole mix of their changes (two thirds) and their codes (one third), and the 35 branches are the level below it (section 12). The form is a pole of a continuum: 43 of its 113 defining rooms lie nearer another form's centre (section 13). This file sits beside the room-forms files, not in forms/, because the stage's close-check reads every account in forms/ as a branch account (departures.jsonl line 18). Hours are counted from the start of the event (h+).

1. How these rooms organized, as a narrative

In these 141 subreddits much of the work was done away from the thread. Members moved their planning into chats, ran scripts that placed pixels for them, and called each other to attack a rival's work. The three did not always go together. Some rooms did one of them, some did two, and a few did all three.

Members opened chats to plan. A r/AmericanFlaginPlace member wrote, "I made a discord server where we can coordinate our efforts live so as to make the best use of our manpower." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0060]. A r/quebec member reported that members had gathered in another room's chat to work on their flag: "plusieurs de nos membres se sont regroupés sur la chaîne Discord de /r/placecanada afin de travailler méticulement sur notre drapeau." [quebec/c0091]. The chat needed upkeep. Invitations expired: "Invite has expired." [AprilKnights/c0012]. A r/GranColombia member asked for a new one, since the old one no longer worked: "Puedes mandar otra invitación de Discord? Esa ya no es valida." [GranColombia/c0034]. In r/reddevils: "Can't seem to join the discord channel" [reddevils/c0231]. What the chat decided came back to the thread: "We on the AFIP discord are going to be following this design for the banner." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0268]. Not everyone went in. A r/reddevils member welcomed the room's script and stayed out of the chat: "Good, I'm glad it's running ! I won't be creating a discord account though." [reddevils/c0123]. After the close a r/masseffect member wrote, "Everyone counted - you could tell we had way more people placing pixels than who was in the little discord." [masseffect/c0231].

Members ran scripts, and the scripts had to be kept in step. "Everyone is using scripts. We're being attacked by scripts. If we don't adapt, we lose." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0473]. Old copies fought new ones: "an older version that sleeping people had on and it's conflicting with a newer version" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0407]. A r/quebec member warned that everyone running a script would have to change at the same time, or the scripts would fight the new design: "tout le monde qui ont des scripts vont devoir changer en même temps parce que sinon ils vont se battre contre le nouveau design." [quebec/c0127]. Then: "Ensuite on se synchronise sur une heure de changement." [quebec/c0137]. A change to the work had to reach the bot. "There is a bot running to maintain it. You will need to get him to edit his pattern before you can add this." [zootopia/c0122]. Later: "Bot template updated!" [zootopia/c0124]. A neighbour complained to r/virginiatech, "Could you please stop adding orange to ruin the border of our A?" [virginiatech/c0087], and a member answered, "We have bots running, but as soon as our guy is awake, they will stop" [virginiatech/c0088].

The rooms argued over the scripts. A r/evex member had taken a rival's bot and changed it to fit the room's banner, and asked, "Do you guys think it would be in the spirit of evex to use the script to clean up the vandalism?" [evex/c0059]. Another answered, "Yeah, I think given the circumstances, that's reasonable." [evex/c0060]. In r/placecanada a member defended the scripts: "A lot of well intentioned Canadians were unknowingly messing it up." [placecanada/c0177]. Another left: "Well, I'm done with /r/placecanada then, I think we've missed the point of place altogether. It's a social experiment, not an opportunity to have bots maintain our image." [placecanada/c0178]. In r/bakchodi a member refused to run another's script: "Running your script would mean, you can change anything and do anything which is too much power for one person/group." [bakchodi/c0154].

Members called attacks. A r/quebec member called the room to arms against the Canadian flag: "CONFRÈRE ET CONSŒUR, CECI EST UN APPEL AUX ARMES! À L'ATTAQUE DU DRAPEAU CANADIEN! SORTEZ LES PIXELS BLEU!" [quebec/c0041]. In r/ohio the first calls were to attack and to build, two minutes apart: "Help us get rid of the UM flag on /r/place" [ohio/c0008]; "Help create Ohioan flag!" [ohio/c0009]. A r/england member posted a script to convert a neighbour: "this should replace the scottish flag with he english :D" [england/c0012]. Members also refused. A r/alberta member proposed an attack, "Currently a Quebec flag has invaded a proud Canadian flag at 347/253." [alberta/c0015], and was told, "What? No. Go away." [alberta/c0019]. In r/AmericanFlaginPlace: "No no I don't condone changing other flags" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0220]. In r/reddevils, a call, "anybody up for destroying the chelsea badge" [reddevils/c0193], was answered, "the fuck? get a life, you weirdo." [reddevils/c0194].

Rivalry ran on after the canvas. A r/reddevils member thanked a rival room "who agreed to the truce and showed respect for the 96." [reddevils/c0207]. The same post went on, "Now that /r/place is over, we can stop pretending be nice and resume normality. Ya cunts." [reddevils/c0208].

2. What the form does

These elements are instantiated in 80 per cent of the defining members or more (_analysis/d5f_model.py, current ledger, particular lines included). The model's prose says them so.

• P01 (113 of 113; 100 per cent of the 558): "The room calls its own members, and kindred subs, to come and place for a work: to start it, build it, finish it or hold it."
• P02 (112 of 113; 100 per cent of the 558): "The room settles what its mark will show of it: a member proposes a picture, the room argues its design, makes its land's flag or emblems the mark, signs it or leaves it unsigned, claims a mark others made, adds to it or enlarges it, or adds a personal piece to a shared mark."
• P03 (110 of 113; 97 per cent of the 558): "The room builds its mark, and members report its state to the thread: what is placed, done or missing, and where."
• P05 (109 of 113; 93 per cent of the 558): "The room keeps its placed work against erosion: members watch it and repair changed pixels, and the room rallies to defend it under attack, covers the night, hardens its shape and puts upkeep before growth. Repair restores the form the keepers know. A change the room has planned or agreed (P02) is therefore repaired away as damage until its keepers are told of it, and it is lost or given up where the telling does not reach them."
• P07 (108 of 113; 89 per cent of the 558): "Rooms spare their neighbours' work, rein in their own attackers, apologise for damage and appeal to attackers to stop."
• P12 (108 of 113; 97 per cent of the 558): "The room records what happened to its work and to the canvas around it: screenshots and timelapses, reports of its fate, mourning, imagined art, atlas entries, the end marked."
• P04 (107 of 113; 97 per cent of the 558): "Members circulate a template that lays out the mark pixel by pixel, or coordinates that locate it, ask for them, and ask strays to keep to them."
• P11 (106 of 113; 96 per cent of the 558): "When a work is up, the room marks it: announces it, celebrates it, credits makers and helpers, reports members' own parts and says what working with strangers meant."
• P16 (106 of 113; 91 per cent of the 558): "Rooms help one another's works and trade help: they give pixels to a neighbour's mark, ask other rooms for help, barter help for space or repair, thank their allies, greet them, and turn requests away."
• R01 (104 of 113; 96 per cent of the 558): "The starter: a member who proposes the mark, maps it or begins placing it. Others joining is not part of the role: it is the answer to the room's call (P15), in the order A02 and A01 state."
• P09 (103 of 113; 78 per cent of the 558): "Rooms attack others' work by the recurring moves the canvas affords: erasing, encroaching, converting a sign, raiding on a streamer's call, planting a script, altering a work as a joke."
• P15 (102 of 113; 91 per cent of the 558): "A member answers a call or proposal in one line that joins, assents, reports a part done or thanks, and the line asks for nothing back."
• P24 (100 of 113; 89 per cent of the 558): "Members ask what the canvas is, how to place, what a call or a name means and what a picture shows, and others explain the rule, the timer, the controls, whose mark a picture is and what happened. They ask before, during and after the close, and some questions get no answer."
• P06 (99 of 113; 87 per cent of the 558): "Members work out who changed their work and why: they trace placers and rooms, find friendly fire or their own mistake, blame officers, or disown placers acting in their name."
• P08 (99 of 113; 86 per cent of the 558): "Rooms propose, settle and contest borders, truces and deals with neighbours by talk, through envoys, and hold each other to them."
• R02 (97 of 113; 81 per cent of the 558): "The envoy: a member who acts for a room toward another room, carrying a proposal between threads or chats."
• K04 (91 of 113; 70 per cent of the 558): "The room acts as a body it was before the canvas, or as a faith in a colour: it argues the nation's history, belonging and politics beyond its flag, carries in the sub's quarrel, lore, jokes or ideology, or professes and spreads a colour."
• P23 (91 of 113; 69 per cent of the 558): "Members move the room's planning into a chat, an existing server or a new one, and invite helpers to it. They bring the chat's designs, decisions and warnings back to the thread. They argue which chat to use, whether a chat is needed or secure, whether it is official, and whether it may decide for the work or bind placers."
• P26 (91 of 113; 78 per cent of the 558): "Members make new jokes out of the canvas work, its mistakes, its damage and its neighbours: puns on the mark, mock names and titles for a figure, and jokes about attackers and bots. The room takes the jokes up, and some members want a joke kept in the work."

The model brings members to a room by calls, has them build and keep a mark, and has some of them turn against a rival (A15). It holds the chat as a candidate (P23), scripts as machine hands (P14) that follow upkeep under strain (A06), and attack calls (P09) met by restraint (A16). These rooms do all of it, and more of the contest. P09, attacks on others' work, is instantiated in 103 of 113 defining members (91 per cent), against 78 per cent of the 558 defining rooms. P18, the contest carried in talk, is instantiated in 88 (78 per cent), against 61. P17, coalitions, in 77 (68 per cent), against 52. P23, the chat, in 91 (81 per cent), against 69. P14, scripts, in 59 (52 per cent), against 40.

3. What it does differently, element by element and arrow by arrow

The change signature. The form's defining members change three fourth-order themes more than the defining population does (at 1.5 times its share or more, in a third of the members or more). Workarounds, the theme of scripts and spare accounts, is changed by 43.4 per cent of them, against 24.9 per cent of the 558 (share ratio 2.06). Backstage decision-making, the theme of the chat, by 42.5 per cent, against 22.8 (ratio 2.29). Repertoire of contention, the theme of attack calls, by 35.4 per cent, against 17.2 (ratio 2.35). Each is held by under half the members. That is why D4a-08c named the form a mixture.

Element by element and arrow by arrow. The table gives every element or arrow and op that 14 defining members or more change, at 1.2 times the defining population's share or more (_analysis/d5f_facts.py). A selected line specifies the model (add-condition, add-step), restricts it (restrict), connects two of its parts (link) or contradicts it. The kind of a line is not relied on (J: kappa 0.08).

No defining member holds a contradict line, so these rooms replace nothing in the model. I read the lines behind the table whole (_analysis/d5f_dump.py: 87 lines on scripts, the chat and withdrawal).

• P14, scripts: specified (add-step 33 members, 29 per cent against 14). The added steps are the coordination scripts need. Members keep script versions and targets in step, route changes through the person who sets the targets, and stop scripts that undo a neighbour's work. r/AmericanFlaginPlace: "Synchronizing script versions and coordinates prevents outdated targets and off-by-one links from wasting placements by repairing one another." r/zootopia: "A proposed revision must reach the operator and be encoded in the target before automated upkeep stops undoing it." Members also argue who may change a shared target and whether bots are fair. r/bakchodi: "Runners evaluate who may change shared targets and refuse to concentrate mutable script power in an untrusted person or group." And scripts serve attacks. r/argentina: "Members propose their own bots to overcome automated resistance to an attempted erasure, not only to maintain their placed work."
• P23, the chat: specified (add-step 20 members, add-condition 17). The steps keep the chat reachable: replacing expired invitations, repairing links, screening who may enter, and relaying between the chat and the thread. r/GranColombia: "Maintaining chat access requires replacing invalid invitations and repairing a failed official link." r/TransFlagPlace: "Admission to the planning venue can require showing pixels already worked on, distinguishing entry screening from merely circulating an invitation." The conditions say whom the chat reaches. r/masseffect: "Chat coordination must reach placers outside the chat, as wider participation and a wished-for sticky reveal an acknowledged communication gap."
• P32, a member stepping away or a quarrel repaired: restricted (12 members, 2.04 times the defining population's share). The lines restrict the element's account of strain. A member who left did so on a principle, not under strain. r/placecanada: "A member leaves because scripts violate the activity's purpose, so departure here must include principled objection rather than assume strain or personal mistreatment."
• A15, from a call to an attack: restricted (18 members, 1.39 times). The record does not show recruited builders turning into attackers (section 7).
• A05, P07 and P08, terms and sparing: specified (add-condition 16, 15; add-step 18). As in form A, an agreement spares a neighbour only where its terms reach the placers, and here the scripts. r/FederationPlace: "A negotiated concession requires updating active bot targets rather than assuming assent immediately controls every running version"; that line restricts A05.

What the model would not predict. The model has machine hands, a chat candidate and attack calls. It does not say that each of them needs its own coordination. A room of this form keeps its scripts in step and argues who controls them. It keeps its chat open and carries the chat's decisions to the thread. It calls attacks, and members refuse some of them, often without a reason. And the same condition runs through the scripts and the chat as through form A's terms: a change binds only the placers, and the running scripts, it reaches.

The rooms that show the form best, by the rule in section 11, are r/quebec and r/reddevils; the one that shows it least well is r/lofihiphop.

What the claim rests on. The form is a cut of the allocation (changes two thirds, codes one third, Ward's method, six forms by J's ruling). Its stability on matched subsamples is about 0.21, and 43 of its defining rooms lie nearer another form's centre. The table's counts are the ledger's. That members kept scripts and chats in step, and called and refused attacks, is a claim on their words, through cite.py, in sections 1, 4 and 11.

The name, read against the members. The name is "the work behind the thread: the chat, the scripts and raiding". The strongest argument that it names the cut rather than what the rooms did: it lists three signatures that are each held by under half the members, and joins two of the eight forms of D4a-08b (the chat and the scripts; raiding as the work). A reader who suspected the name would look for members who hold none of the three. There are 20 of 113 (section 14). The name is accurate as a list, and it says what the form is: a mixture. I keep it, and I make no renaming proposal.

4. The concepts it employs

First-order concepts for each change the form leans to, through cite.py:

• The scripts kept in step. "Since the scripts both scan right to left then top to bottom, people running the scripts get to that point, and if the opposite one ran first, they use your place to "fix" it... so that's wasting some effort." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0469]. "Right now, we need anyone to stop using old scripts and move to the new one above." [ukplace/c0027].
• Who controls a script. "I agree I could change it, but you will have to take a leap of faith my friend." [bakchodi/c0153]. "we were planning on centering the logo today. Your best bet is talking to y8QbrYsfrOW9rkt8Y4nNv2jQhxA= he has been setting the bot scripts for us." [minnesotavikings/c0231].
• The chat kept open. "looks like I also had the wrong link." [AprilKnights/c0014]. "Can you link to pixels you've worked on?" [TransFlagPlace/c0184].
• The chat's decisions brought back. "Spread the word to the discord" [dwarffortress/c0126]. "Si vous avez une meilleure idée venez la faire valoir sur le discord." [quebec/c0123].
• The attack called. "can we plzzzz get rid of the commie flag" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0007].
• The attack refused. "What? No. Go away." [alberta/c0019].

5. Composition here

Three judgments are kept apart.

The original global model (historical). verdicts-D.jsonl, by the last analyst ruling or else the readers' agreement. All 141 members: composes 58, composes with residue 81, does not compose 0, cannot tell 2. The 113 defining members: composes 43, composes with residue 70, does not compose 0, cannot tell 0. The two that cannot tell are r/Braveryjerk, a thin room with one selected change and 4 coded concepts, and r/wario, a core room with 1. These verdicts describe the unadapted model at the first return.

The adapted local accounts. By adaptation-returns.jsonl and the current model hash (46384686), as vlib.local_return_states reads them, all 141 members are unresolved; none is validated and none has insufficient evidence. The limit D3 named is the same for each: the labelers marked every local account unresolved, and prior.md section 3's measure of local validation was not computed (J after the D3c interview). The unresolved members are:

r/aeon, r/afip, r/albania, r/alberta, r/AmericanFlaginPlace, r/anarchism, r/AprilKnights, r/archlinux, r/argentina, r/armenia, r/armok, r/aromantic, r/asexual, r/austria, r/AyyMD, r/azores, r/bakchodi, r/bangladesh, r/bees, r/belgium, r/brasil, r/Bravenewbies, r/Braveryjerk, r/canucks, r/cardinals, r/catalonia, r/chibears, r/chile, r/cloud9, r/counting, r/cuboulder, r/czech, r/darksouls, r/DatBoi, r/destiny, r/Dominican, r/duckgame, r/dwarffortress, r/england, r/EraseThePlace, r/evex, r/falcons, r/FaroeIslands, r/FederationPlace, r/floridagators, r/france, r/freedomplanet, r/fullcommunism, r/GranColombia, r/GreenCorner, r/GuardiansOfDatBoi, r/HomestarRunner, r/Homura, r/hyperlightdrifter, r/ik_ihe, r/india, r/indieheads, r/kanye, r/latvia, r/lebanon, r/linux, r/liquicity, r/lithuania, r/littlebusters, r/livecounting, r/lofihiphop, r/loltyler1, r/luxembourg, r/madokamagica, r/masseffect, r/megaman, r/mexico, r/minnesotavikings, r/monero, r/msu, r/nerf, r/neu, r/norge, r/ockytop, r/ohio, r/OKState, r/OrderOfTheKoi, r/pakistan, r/parahumans, r/pathofexile, r/pgang, r/Pigifs, r/PinkVomitMonster, r/placecanada, r/placehfarts, r/PlaceNL, r/placesnek, r/placestart, r/polska, r/purplecorner, r/PurplePixels, r/quebec, r/quq, r/reddevils, r/russia, r/Russiaclan, r/sakartvelo, r/serbia, r/shitredditsays, r/simonfraser, r/singapore, r/Slovakia, r/slovenia, r/spain, r/spongebob, r/stlouis, r/stlouisblues, r/straya, r/sweden, r/tagpro, r/TeamDignitas, r/theblackvoid, r/thebluecorner, r/Thegreatblackhole, r/TheGreatGreenBox, r/theitalyplace, r/touhou, r/TransFlagPlace, r/turkey, r/udub, r/ukplace, r/ukraine, r/UMiami, r/undertale, r/unitedkingdom, r/uofm, r/uofmn, r/virginiatech, r/wales, r/wallstreetbets, r/wario, r/WisconsinBadgers, r/worldpowers, r/WPI, r/wsu, r/zootopia

The shared form explanation: unresolved. The form's members share no single lean. Each of its three signatures is held by under half its defining members, and the three are held by different rooms at about the rate chance would give (section 14). 43 of the 113 defining members lie nearer another form's centre. So the form describes these rooms as a group whose work ran behind the thread in one of three ways. It does not explain them jointly. Every member's own adapted account is unresolved as well. A verdict of composes with residue on the original model is not a current local or shared failure.

6. How the model runs here

Counts are of defining members with a current-ledger line, particular lines included (_analysis/d5f_model.py); they count any line of an op.

The elements that do the work. The elements of section 2, with the contest above the population's rate: P09 (91 per cent against 78), P18 (78 against 61), P17 (68 against 52), P23 (81 against 69) and P14 (52 against 40).

The elements that sit idle. P34 is absent in 111 of 113 defining members, P30 in 99, A21 in 98, K07 in 92, P28 in 89, P33 in 87 and P29 in 78. They are idle in the population too. One idle arrow marks the form: A10, from judging too few hands to the move, is absent in 79 of 113 (70 per cent), against 53 per cent of the 558. These rooms seldom moved.

The elements that fit less here. K01, the April Fools frame, is instantiated in 45 of 113 (40 per cent), against 57 per cent of the 558.

What these rooms do that the model has no place for. 28 of 113 defining members carry 37 propose lines, against 210 of the 558 defining rooms. The propose lines are not part of the form's signatures.

Where the room models and my reading disagree. They agree. r/quebec's model keeps "the executable-target condition because a script must actually update", and r/AmericanFlaginPlace's model says that "Coordinate errors and mutually correcting scripts also require technical synchronization beyond merely telling people the latest intention". My reading of the members' lines is the same.

The held proposals (QD4-001; never served to any room, not re-checked). The model above is the frozen version. J ruled that both held proposals are stated in full wherever the model is reported. They are, as the tree file states them:

• P05, move 198 (contrasting), history lines 173 to 176, reverted by line 181 (move 203). The statement would gain: "This holds where the keepers can learn of a planned change only by being told, and no informed member holds it." The status would be bounded. The bound would read: "It does not hold where the keepers read a planned change from its shape and stop repairing it with no telling: completeanarchy, polska, satania, halo, bangtan, thesilphroad (R-completeanarchy-c187508d7ae3-022, R-polska-dadda7358f9a-049, R-satania-84df196116f3-022, R-halo-b988854ba168-036, R-bangtan-7efe23da0d0c-070, R-thesilphroad-a3f86618e239-018), a candidate branch, 'the shape read' (F-024). It does not hold where informed members hold the change against keepers who do not know: armok, maryland, oneshot (R-armok-8852b2ab85f8-022, R-maryland-d1b6e2d1d5f3-017, R-oneshot-e840e127e9b2-013), a limit below the trigger, at three nodes. Amended at D4a-01, after the D3 freeze (46384686...); not re-checked: no room was served these words." Rooms: completeanarchy, polska, satania, halo, bangtan, thesilphroad, armok, maryland, oneshot. Lines: R-completeanarchy-c187508d7ae3-022, R-polska-dadda7358f9a-049, R-satania-84df196116f3-022, R-halo-b988854ba168-036, R-bangtan-7efe23da0d0c-070, R-thesilphroad-a3f86618e239-018, R-armok-8852b2ab85f8-022, R-maryland-d1b6e2d1d5f3-017, R-oneshot-e840e127e9b2-013.
• A11, move 199 (dropping working hypotheses), history lines 177 to 180, reverted by line 182 (move 203). The arrow from P02 to P04 would be withdrawn (status withdrawn, in_model false). Its reason, as written: "Rule 16 and rule 14: preserve what remains supported, and replace or withdraw what does not. No defensible formulation of A11 as an arrow survives the return. (1) The order between rooms never beat its null (111 of 185 rooms, 0.600; null p95 0.670; base_rate_beaten false), and C2 withdrew it, keeping a transition inside threads. (2) Inside threads, the return's census (D3a-38, re-run as _analysis/d4a01_a11_classes.json) shows the transition in 111 rooms and template first in 98 of the 228 rooms whose lines show both ends; across threads 19 more. The reverse order is nearly as common, so the arrow carries no direction. (3) The failure clause is present and stands alone in 117 rooms: talk only in 31 (berkeley, bih, bitcoin, edboxes, eve, FinalFantasy, guatemala, habs, HomestarRunner, indieheads, ireland, latvia, leagueoflegends, mexico, morrowind, msu, parrots, placeDE, placesnek, polska, portugal, quebec, samuraijack, slovenia, spain, suomi, titanfall, torontoraptors, unitedkingdom, wine, zootopia) and layout only in 86. (4) The mechanism's word 'settled' is contradicted by 261 accepted restrict lines whose 'how' says a template does not settle the design for good (rival templates, polls, later redesigns, placers who deviate). A reworded arrow (a layout answers design talk in its thread) would be a new claim, never served to any room, with its reverse nearly as common: a co-occurrence, not an arrow. What remains supported, that design talk and layouts meet in threads, is held by P02's and P04's statements and ranges ('a design argued over days and redone'; 'an official template the room asks everyone to follow against other versions'), which stand. The arrow's record keeps its evidence and reasoning." Rooms (the talk-only rooms of the failure clause): berkeley, bih, bitcoin, edboxes, eve, FinalFantasy, guatemala, habs, HomestarRunner, indieheads, ireland, latvia, leagueoflegends, mexico, morrowind, msu, parrots, placeDE, placesnek, polska, portugal, quebec, samuraijack, slovenia, spain, suomi, titanfall, torontoraptors, unitedkingdom, wine, zootopia. Lines (the first-return lines of the census classes talk only, layout only and template first, 216): 2007scape-012, 4chan-011, AMD-012, AmericanFlaginPlace-009, AvoArmy-011, AyyMD-041, CKCrusaders-041, CSUFoCo-015, DestinyTheGame-014, DevonUK-010, FinalFantasy-014, GuardiansOfDatBoi-009, HomestarRunner-015, MonkeyIsland-011, NewMexico-015, ScottPilgrim-015, Temple-041, TsundereSharks-048, adventuretime-041, aggies-050, albania-046, alberta-016, anaheimducks-015, animalcrossing-053, anime-012, argentina-051, armenia-030, bardmains-055, berkeley-038, berserk-012, bih-036, bisexual-012, bitcoin-012, blackmirror-046, borderlands-020, bostonbruins-052, brasil-011, canada-012, catalonia-009, catholicism-011, cfb-048, chibears-010, chicubs-010, cirkeltrek-013, clashroyale-045, completeanarchy-011, criticalrole-043, crusaderkings-039, cubers-014, cuboulder-008, czech-014, dankmemes-045, darksouls-042, detroitlions-049, edboxes-046, edmontonoilers-041, empiredidnothingwrong-013, england-045, ethereum-056, europe-050, eve-049, fivenightsatfreddys-012, flashtv-055, floridagators-035, flyers-035, formula1-048, forsen-010, ftlgame-044, fxKorea-010, gameattack-015, gamindustri-053, gatech-041, ghibli-010, globaloffensive-012, greenbaypackers-011, guatemala-010, habs-011, heyyea-010, hongkong-047, hsv-012, hyperlightdrifter-046, indieheads-056, indonesia-035, ireland-045, italy-035, katawashoujo-041, lakers-009, latvia-029, leagueoflegends-042, lifeisstrange-013, linux-015, littlewitchacademia-012, loliconsunite-010, lost-044, lovelive-041, lsu-049, luxembourg-012, madokamagica-041, magictcg-010, mechanicalkeyboards-042, metalgearsolid-013, mexico-041, miamidolphins-041, minecraft-017, mit-041, mizzou-018, mls-053, monalisaclan-013, morrowind-011, msu-011, muse-048, mylittlepony-011, nVade-013, naruto-010, nbaspurs-056, necrodancer-011, neopets-047, newzealand-046, nightinthewoods-012, nin-012, ockytop-042, opticgaming-012, overwatch-017, parahumans-013, parrots-013, pathofexile-012, pcmasterrace-013, pebble-007, penguins-055, philippines-052, pitt-041, placeDE-041, placecanada-013, placesnek-031, planetside-056, polska-054, portal-012, portugal-082, predators-010, purdue-051, puzzleanddragons-013, quebec-013, radiohead-010, rainbowgrid-006, rangers-045, re_zero-042, redpandas-018, rickandmorty-042, rit-011, rocketbeans-008, rocketleague-011, romania-015, roosterteeth-013, rpi-049, russia-052, rust-010, rutgers-012, samuraijack-047, scp-014, seahawks-014, serbia-051, singapore-016, slovenia-041, smite-010, southpark-012, spacexmasterrace-052, spain-035, ss13-016, ssbpm-012, stardewvalley-058, starryknights-041, stevenuniverse-012, straya-047, suomi-041, survivor-035, sweden-045, tampabaylightning-045, terraria-048, teslamotors-012, tf2-041, thebluecorner-016, theexpanse-012, theitalyplace-054, thepointing-043, thesimpsons-011, tinytardis-009, titanfall-013, torontoraptors-016, totallynotrobots-013, transformers-046, trees-013, turkey-055, twentyonepilots-012, ubc-046, ucf-050, uiuc-011, ultrahardcore-005, undertale-011, unitedkingdom-035, unturned-013, uofm-008, uofmn-035, uruguay-012, utahjazz-009, utaustin-013, uva-042, uwaterloo-011, vegan-043, virginiatech-043, weezer-053, wine-011, witcher-017, worldoftanks-015, xenoblade_chronicles-012, zelda-061, zootopia-012.

2 of form B's rooms are among the rooms of the P05 proposal (r/armok, r/polska). 12 are among the talk-only rooms of the A11 proposal's failure clause: r/HomestarRunner, r/indieheads, r/latvia, r/mexico, r/msu, r/placesnek, r/polska, r/quebec, r/slovenia, r/spain, r/unitedkingdom, r/zootopia.

7. The restrict lines: the arrow fails here, or the record cannot show it

The rule, logged at D5a-36 before reading, unchanged. I read every restrict line on an arrow held by a defining member, 292 lines, and sorted each how sentence (_analysis/d5f_restricts.py; my sort in d5a37_sort_1.json to d5a37_sort_4.json, joined in d5a37_restrict_sorted.json). The arrow fails here: the line says the consequent came without the antecedent, from another source or in another order, or that the antecedent did not lead to it. The record cannot show it: the line says the order, the link or the step is not visible, not dated or not established in the record. Both, where it says both. Neither, where it states a condition or a scope, or says that the two acts coincide or overlap. This is one reader's sort, mine; no second coder read it (J: no readers for the rest of the run).

The form's own arrows. A06 runs from keeping to scripts: scripts follow upkeep under strain. In 11 of its 18 restrict lines here the arrow fails, and in 4 more it fails and the record cannot show the rest. Scripts and spare accounts came for building or for attack, before any strain. r/TeamDignitas: "Spare accounts are used before the first maintenance call, so upkeep pressure cannot explain the onset of their observed use." A06's own bound already says that where a room scripted its building from the start, machine hands come before any upkeep, and that spare accounts can serve an attack first. So these lines restate the bound. A15 runs from a call to an attack. In 11 of its 18 lines the record cannot show it: the members called builders and called attacks, but the record does not show the same hands turned from one to the other. r/chile: "Recruitment and attack calls coexist without identifying recruits diverted from construction into attack." A16 runs from an attack call to restraint. In 7 of its 10 lines the arrow fails as its mechanism states it: the refusal came bare, or the proposer withdrew. r/serbia: "This refusal gives no reason, preserving a local exception to the model's usual reason-giving pattern without contradicting its statistical qualification." The mechanism says a refusal usually comes with a reason, so these lines are inside it too.

The arrows every form restricts. A11 (a template settles a design) fails here in 34 of 56 lines, and A10 (judging too few hands, then the move) in 15 of 20. They are restricted here at or below the population's rate; A10 far below it, because these rooms seldom moved. A12 (a call, then a bare answer) fails in 12 of 21 lines: acceptances came with a question or a condition, refusals without a reason.

Where the record cannot show it. The record cannot show who joined because of a call (A01, 8 of 11 lines), that a call turned members against a rival (A15, 11 of 18), or whether help arrived (A13, 7 of 24).

So the two readings divide by kind, as in form A. Where the line concerns the order of two acts the rooms report (keeping and scripts, a template and a design, an attack call and its answer), it mostly says the arrow fails as stated, and mostly inside bounds the model already writes. Where it concerns cause (recruited hands turned to attack, help delivered), it mostly says the record cannot show it. Across all 292 lines: the arrow fails here in 135, the record cannot show it in 83, both in 22, neither in 52.

8. The one relationship that runs differently here

A06 runs from P05 (keeping) to P14 (machine hands). Its connection: "in a room carrying both, the first act of upkeep or defence comes before the first script, bot or extra account". Its mechanism: "Upkeep under attack outruns what one pixel per interval can hold, and members turn to scripts and spare accounts to keep up."

In r/AmericanFlaginPlace it runs as stated, in the members' words. The room built its flag and turned to keeping it: "We have built the American flag. Now we must maintain it." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0128]. Under attack, a member argued for scripts: "Everyone is using scripts. We're being attacked by scripts. If we don't adapt, we lose." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0473].

In r/placecanada it runs on another ground. The scripts kept the room's own members from undoing the design: "Yes, we are using several scripts. It was the only way we could get our maple leaf to retain it's shape. A lot of well intentioned Canadians were unknowingly messing it up." [placecanada/c0177]. The strain came from friendly hands, not from an attack, and it cost the room a member (section 1). In r/england a script served a conversion, not upkeep: "this should replace the scottish flag with he english :D" [england/c0012].

In 18 of 113 defining members a current-ledger line restricts A06, against 17.0 per cent of the 558; the form does not restrict it more than the population does. What runs differently here is what follows the script: the rooms of this form give the script its own coordination (P14 add-step in 33 members, section 3). The model has scripts follow upkeep. In these rooms the scripts are themselves kept, updated and argued over.

This is description, not a test. A06's expectation in form B is 0.600 (3 within-case datings over 705 rooms, times 141), so A06 is not-testable-here (section 10).

9. Fourth-order themes over- and under-represented

The rule was logged at D5a-01 before it ran (_analysis/d5_themes.py), and it is applied here to the defining members' codes (_analysis/d5f_facts.py). A member's coded concepts are counted by the fourth-order themes of their second-order theme's placements, and the form's pooled share on a theme is set against the pooled share over all 705 rooms. Over-represented: a ratio of 1.5 or more, with the theme present in 5 members or more. Under-represented: a ratio of 0.67 or less, with a population share of 1 per cent or more. These are shares of what the coders coded in these rooms, never a property of the rooms (contract section 5).

Over-represented (10).

• Neo-tribes: 4.4 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 1.1 per cent (ratio 4.14), in 8 members.
• Decided order: 0.8 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 0.3 per cent (ratio 2.72), in 14 members.
• Meta-organization: 3.5 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 1.6 per cent (ratio 2.22), in 39 members.
• Repertoire of contention: 6.7 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 3.0 per cent (ratio 2.21), in 76 members.
• Flagging the nation: 1.7 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 0.8 per cent (ratio 2.18), in 27 members.
• Workarounds: 4.2 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 2.1 per cent (ratio 1.99), in 70 members.
• Backstage decision-making: 4.2 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 2.4 per cent (ratio 1.78), in 69 members.
• Symbolic boundaries: 0.8 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 0.4 per cent (ratio 1.75), in 16 members.
• Rivalry: 1.7 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 1.0 per cent (ratio 1.67), in 31 members.
• Live and let live: 3.5 per cent of the defining members' coded concepts against 2.1 per cent (ratio 1.65), in 50 members.

In the rooms' words, from members holding the largest share on each theme (_analysis/d5f_theme_quotes.py): Workarounds, "Right now, we need anyone to stop using old scripts and move to the new one above." [ukplace/c0027]. Backstage decision-making, "Here is a discord server I just created just for this sub." [bangladesh/c0025]. Repertoire of contention, "Ayncraps trying to steal our flag on /place is like a visual representation of their relationship to the actual anarchist movement." [anarchism/c0055]. Live and let live, "There's a massive difference between untouched, and bumming someone else's work." [worldpowers/c0025]. Meta-organization, "we would like to ask for some room under your art, of course not touching anything and travelling around and behind your badge. Suggestions?" [FederationPlace/c0040]. Flagging the nation, "making a hearth between the flags, like sweden and norway. wanna join?" [lithuania/c0077].

Under-represented (2): Keying (ratio 0.23), Direct information sharing (ratio 0.46).

The three signature themes restate the cut in part; the codes are a third of the distance. Beside them the coders coded more of the canvas as a field of nations, rivals and tribes, and of the argument over what may be covered (Live and let live). They coded less of the April Fools frame and less posting of the mark's state to the thread (Direct information sharing). That fits rooms whose work ran in chats and scripts, without showing why.

10. Arrows present, absent or not-testable-here

Section 1's arithmetic, declared at D5a-01: an arrow's expectation in a form is its within-case datings (its subs, counted over the 705 analysed rooms) over 705, times the form's n, here 141. Below one the arrow is not-testable-here, and no absence, boundary condition or failed proposition may be written from it. In form B the expectations run from 0.000 to 0.800:

• A01 (P01 to P03): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A02 (R01 to P01): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A03 (P03 to P05): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A04 (P05 to P08): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A05 (P08 to P07): 3 datings, expected 0.600; not-testable-here
• A06 (P05 to P14): 3 datings, expected 0.600; not-testable-here
• A07 (P03 to P11): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A08 (P11 to P12): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A09 (P12 to P13): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A10 (K02 to P10): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A11 (P02 to P04): 2 datings, expected 0.400; not-testable-here
• A12 (P01 to P15): 3 datings, expected 0.600; not-testable-here
• A13 (P05 to P16): 4 datings, expected 0.800; not-testable-here
• A14 (P08 to P16): 4 datings, expected 0.800; not-testable-here
• A15 (P01 to P09): 4 datings, expected 0.800; not-testable-here
• A16 (P09 to P07): 4 datings, expected 0.800; not-testable-here
• A17 (P09 to P08): 4 datings, expected 0.800; not-testable-here
• A18 (P09 to P18): 4 datings, expected 0.800; not-testable-here
• A19 (P05 to P17): 4 datings, expected 0.800; not-testable-here
• A20 (P01 to P20): 3 datings, expected 0.600; not-testable-here
• A21 (P08 to P21): 0 datings, expected 0.000; not-testable-here

Present: none. Absent: none. Not-testable-here: all 21. Members' current-ledger lines on an arrow (sections 7 and 8) are description only. Members among an arrow's within-case datings: r/czech (A17); r/DatBoi (A15); r/france (A20); r/lebanon (A12); r/mexico (A09); r/PlaceNL (A16, A17); r/reddevils (A03); r/stlouis (A15); r/touhou (A07); r/udub (A11); r/unitedkingdom (A18); r/wallstreetbets (A11). That is arithmetic about the model's own evidence, and it tests nothing in the form.

Propositions. N01, N02, N03, N04, N05, N06, N07, N08, N09; the highest expectation among the arrows they rest on is 0.800. Every proposition is not testable here; none holds and none fails against a real expectation. No findings.jsonl line is bounded from this form.

11. How representative members do the work

The rule, logged at D5a-36 before it ran, unchanged (_analysis/d5f_facts.py). Fit is a defining member's distance to the form's centre in the allocation's 892 columns. The best two are the nearest members whose selected changes and coded concepts are at or above the form's defining medians (10 changes, 131 concepts). The least well is the farthest defining member. The member read at length is, among the ten nearest, the one with the most selected changes not read at length earlier in stage D5. For a mixture the centre lies between its patterns: nine of the ten nearest rooms change two or three of the form's signature themes.

Best fit: r/quebec (distance 0.766; 22 selected changes; 203 coded concepts; first-return verdict composes, re-check grade composes with residue; in F28 and F29). Its selected changes hold the chat and the scripts, and its record holds an attack call as well. Its first post proposed the flag: "je ne vous propose rien de moins que de créer le drapeau du Québec sur /r/place." [quebec/c0001]. Members moved into another room's chat, and later made one of their own, because those who had worked on the flag wanted to keep in touch: "Ceux qui ont travaillé ensemble sur le drapeau avons décidé de garder contact entre nous et avons créé une chaîne Discord dédiée à /r/quebec." [quebec/c0092]. Friendly hands overwrote the design: "On a des problèmes de coordination. Beaucoup de Québécois remplacent notre patriote par du bleu." [quebec/c0124]. A member proposed an official design, "Bon, alors faisons la stratégie officielle de faire un joli drapeau Patriote." [quebec/c0125], and warned that the scripts would fight it unless they changed together: "ceux qui sont sur le script vont se battre automatiquement contre parce que c'est pas dans le plan vert blanc rouge." [quebec/c0199]. The room called an attack on the Canadian flag (section 1), and members argued against spending effort that way: "Tout ce que je dis c'est que plus on met de l'effort à endommager leur drapeau plutôt que de défendre le notre, plus on aura de trouble." [quebec/c0027]. It spared a square once a member explained that someone had made it for a dead friend: "Ok on laisse faire, c'est bien la moindre des choses." [quebec/c0170].

Second best fit: r/reddevils (distance 0.799; 22 selected changes; 236 coded concepts; first-return verdict composes with residue, re-check grade composes with residue; in F01, F03, F29 and F30; by the centres its point lies nearer form D's than form B's). A member pointed the room to its chat and asked for a script: "We also need a script or someone who can design a code for our crest to help fend off these attacks." [reddevils/c0149]. The script came, and a member welcomed it while refusing the chat (section 1). Members asked that a truce be posted so that placers would learn it: "Make a post quick about the truce so people like me stop trying to overtake them due ignorance." [reddevils/c0144]. One asked whether a truce was needed at all: "Do they outnumber us? Because if they don't I think there's no reason for a truce." [reddevils/c0236]. An attack call was turned down without a reason (section 1), and after the close the room's rivalry with a neighbour resumed in talk (section 1).

Least well: r/lofihiphop (distance 1.415; 6 selected changes; 12 coded concepts; first-return verdict composes; in F15, F21 and F30; its point lies nearer form E's centre). Its record is a few exchanges. Its first posts were April Fools jokes: "#HAH NICE APRIL FOOLS JOKE" [lofihiphop/c0002]. A member was confused by the plan, "im confused" [lofihiphop/c0006], and received an image. Late on the last day another proposed a takeover, "Let's take over the upper right hand corner for r/lofihiphop!!!" [lofihiphop/c0009], and was sent back to the existing plan and to the chat: "Peep discord and forums for updates on our plan." [lofihiphop/c0011]. Its lines touch the chat twice and hold no script and no attack call. It is in form B because Ward's method put it there.

Read at length: r/AmericanFlaginPlace (distance 0.807; 23 selected changes; 609 coded concepts; first-return verdict composes with residue, re-check grade composes with residue; in F08, F23 and F29). The rule chose it: among the ten nearest it has the most selected changes and was not read at length earlier. Its selected changes hold the chat and the scripts, and its record holds attack calls and their refusal. The room was made to build a large flag. A member opened a chat "to make the best use of our manpower" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0060], and the chat's choices returned to the thread (section 1). The chat itself had to be kept: "Void raid on our discord server as of 8:43 am EST" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0505]. Once the flag stood, members turned to keeping it: "We have built the American flag. Now we must maintain it." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0128]. Under attack they turned to scripts (section 8), and the scripts had to be kept in step: "the one that i linked in the comment though was apparently off by one pixel and messing with the other one. i removed my comment, hopefully things will get sorted out" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0470]. Members called attacks, "can we plzzzz get rid of the commie flag" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0007], and members refused them (section 1). The room held a truce, "We have a truce with the tree and therefore RR. Also indie heads for their album cover. The flag is not to be expanded." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0173], and admitted that some members broke it: "Some folks did get too aggressive with the expansion, despite pleas to hold back" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0216]. It kept a political group's name off the flag while thanking that group for its help: "We are thankful for their help with building the flag, but getting political will only anger people which may lead to the flag being hurt." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0151]. A member called the defence a losing battle and kept the script running: "I'll keep the script running, but that's losing battle." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0465]. An hour later: "I was totally wrong." [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0466]. At the close a member was still calling defenders, "Please stay focused on the main goal- PROTECT THE FLAG!" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0573], and was told, "Dude the war is over go home :)" [AmericanFlaginPlace/c0574]. What is unrepresentative about it: its record is the largest of the ten nearest, 609 coded concepts against the form's defining median of 131, and its record holds all three parts at once, where most members' changes hold one or two.

12. The branches its rooms come from

J asked that stage D6 build on the forms with the 35 branches as the level below. The branches do not nest in the forms: a branch was cut on one shared key, a form gathers rooms by the whole mix of their changes and codes. The table gives, for every branch, how many of its rooms are in form B, and the branch's share in B against B's share of the 705 rooms (141 of 705, 0.200). A ratio of 1 is what a branch would show if its rooms fell in the forms at random.

What the table shows. Six branches lean to form B at 1.5 times its share or more. They are the branches of machine hands and the chat:

• F08, machine hands kept on one target: 27 of 50.
• F16, the chat kept open: 15 of 35.
• F29, the chat's reach conditional: 10 of 25.
• F15, the plan kept current: 14 of 42.
• F30, the chat seen only through its invitations and returned reports: 8 of 24.
• F20, the close as news: 3 of 10.

No branch was cut on attack calls, so raiding has no branch to come from. 5 of the 103 rooms of F01, the April Fools play, are in form B. No branch lies mostly in form B: the largest share is F08's, 0.540.

Rooms in no branch. 54 rooms (33 defining): r/albania (thin), r/alberta, r/anarchism, r/argentina, r/armenia, r/aromantic (thin), r/asexual, r/austria, r/azores (thin), r/bangladesh, r/bees (thin), r/brasil, r/Bravenewbies (thin), r/Braveryjerk (thin), r/cardinals, r/counting (thin), r/cuboulder (thin), r/DatBoi, r/Dominican, r/duckgame, r/england, r/floridagators, r/france, r/GreenCorner, r/HomestarRunner, r/Homura (thin), r/latvia, r/littlebusters (thin), r/madokamagica, r/norge (thin), r/pathofexile, r/pgang (core), r/Pigifs (thin), r/PinkVomitMonster, r/placecanada, r/placehfarts (thin), r/placesnek, r/quq (core), r/Russiaclan, r/sakartvelo (core), r/singapore, r/Slovakia, r/stlouisblues, r/straya, r/sweden (thin), r/TeamDignitas, r/Thegreatblackhole, r/TheGreatGreenBox (thin), r/theitalyplace, r/UMiami (core), r/wales, r/wario (core), r/worldpowers, r/wsu (thin).

13. The nearest form and what separates them

The nearest form is A, the terms between neighbours, with the plan announced. The distances between form B's centre and the others are A 0.366, C 0.374, D 0.391, F 0.547, E 0.809; A and C lie at nearly the same distance. In the tree, B joins C (the design and its marking) at five forms, and the two join A at three. A and B are separated by what the rooms changed: A's members change the order between rooms and the plan, B's the chat, the scripts and attack calls. Both forms' lines carry the same condition, that a change binds only the placers and scripts it reaches.

The rooms between forms. D 19, A 15, C 6, F 3: these are the forms whose centres lie nearer than B's to its defining members, 43 rooms in all, more than a third. The room that could have gone either way, the defining member with the smallest margin to another centre, is r/kanye (14 selected changes, 471 coded concepts). Its point lies nearer form D's centre, the form of keeping. In its record a moderator turned down cheating during an attack; the coders' line: "A moderator rejects cheating during an attack, so maintenance pressure alone cannot establish accepted automation."

14. The split below the form, and whether the chat, the scripts and raiding stand apart

The split rule, logged at D5a-36 before it ran, unchanged (_analysis/d5f_split.py, on room-forms-tree-rooms.tsv). A split reads as a split when both parts hold 10 defining rooms or more and each part has a fourth-order change column (a node or a link) at 1.5 times the parent's defining share or more, held by a third of the part or more and by fewer in the other part. The walk descends only while splits read.

Form B's first split, at eight forms, does not read as a split. B.2 (25 defining rooms, 34 in all) leans to the repertoire of contention: 96 per cent of its defining rooms hold attack calls, against 18 per cent of B.1. It is the eight-form cut's "raiding as the work". B.1 (88 defining rooms, 107 in all) has no column of its own at 1.5 times the form's share. The share of defining rooms holding each signature theme in each part: B.1: Workarounds 0.375, Backstage decision-making 0.489, Repertoire of contention 0.182; B.2: Workarounds 0.640, Backstage decision-making 0.200, Repertoire of contention 0.960. The walk stops at the form.

Whether the chat, the scripts and raiding stand apart. The rule for this question was logged at this leg's opening, before any script ran (_analysis/d5f_mixture.py, d5a37_mixture.json). It takes the three signature columns, the defining members that hold each, their overlaps against independence, and where each set falls in the tree.

• They are held by different rooms, at about chance. Workarounds (the scripts; anchored elements P14, K05, K06) is held by 49 defining members, Backstage decision-making (the chat; P23, P33) by 48, and Repertoire of contention (attack calls; P09, C02, P33) by 40. The scripts and the chat overlap in 19 members, against 20.8 if the two were independent. The scripts and attack calls overlap in 18, against 17.3. The chat and attack calls overlap in 14, against 17.0. All three meet in 7, against 7.4. 20 members hold none of the three. 19 hold only the scripts, 22 only the chat and 15 only attack calls.
• The tree sorts them one level down, not at the first split. At the first split, 43 of the 48 chat members and 33 of the 49 script members fall in B.1, and 24 of the 40 attack members fall in B.2. At the second level they part: the chat sits in B.1.1 (35 of its 48 members; 54 defining rooms), the scripts in B.1.2 (24 of 49; 34 defining rooms) and in B.2.1 (15), and attack calls in B.2 (24 of B.2's 25 rooms hold them).
• By the split rule no part is a subform. Run from B.1, as a description beyond the walk (d5a37_split_B1.json), B.1's own split at twelve forms does not read either. B.1.2 leans to the scripts (2.20 times B.1's share; 0.706 of the part against 0.167) and to the negotiated order (0.824 against 0.407). B.1.1, the chat, has no lean of its own; it is the form's centre.
• The rule's outcome. I set it before any script ran: the patterns stand apart if their holders overlap no more than independence gives and the tree's first split sorts them into different parts; they are mixed if the holders overlap more than independence or neither condition holds. The overlaps are at independence, within a room. The first split does not sort the three into different parts: the chat and the scripts fall together in B.1. So the rule gives neither outcome. It did not foresee this case, and I report it as what the counts show: three patterns held by different rooms, which the tree sorts only at its second level, and none of them a subform by the split rule. Raiding is the nearest to a part of its own (B.2), the scripts come next (B.1.2), and the chat is the form's centre (B.1.1).

So the answer to the question is yes, as patterns, and no, as subforms. The chat, the scripts and raiding are three different things that rooms did behind the thread. Few rooms did all three. The allocation put them in one form; the counts above do not say why, and I have not measured it. B.2 (raiding) and B.1.2 (the scripts, with the terms) are candidate subforms for D6 (notes-D5.md), not cut here.

15. The thin and core rooms placed here

Thin rooms (23), placed by the whole mix of their changes and codes at the nearest form centre: r/afip (3 changes, 75 concepts), r/albania (3 changes, 69 concepts), r/aromantic (2 changes, 9 concepts), r/azores (1 change, 4 concepts), r/bees (1 change, 5 concepts), r/Bravenewbies (2 changes, 7 concepts), r/Braveryjerk (1 change, 4 concepts), r/counting (2 changes, 143 concepts), r/cuboulder (1 change, 35 concepts), r/destiny (4 changes, 96 concepts), r/Homura (1 change, 30 concepts), r/ik_ihe (2 changes, 15 concepts), r/littlebusters (1 change, 4 concepts), r/livecounting (4 changes, 61 concepts), r/norge (1 change, 302 concepts), r/Pigifs (4 changes, 38 concepts), r/placehfarts (1 change, 15 concepts), r/sweden (4 changes, 835 concepts), r/TheGreatGreenBox (4 changes, 57 concepts), r/ukraine (3 changes, 51 concepts), r/WisconsinBadgers (4 changes, 30 concepts), r/WPI (3 changes, 57 concepts), r/wsu (3 changes, 15 concepts).

Their selected lines weigh less and enter no share above. The most frequent are P14 add-step 4 (r/albania, r/livecounting, r/ukraine, r/WPI); P01 add-step 2 (r/Bravenewbies, r/Pigifs); P01 link 2 (r/afip, r/Bravenewbies); P04 link 2 (r/Braveryjerk, r/WisconsinBadgers); A11 restrict 2 (r/albania, r/WisconsinBadgers); P05 add-condition 2 (r/afip, r/ukraine); P03 add-step 2 (r/aromantic, r/ik_ihe); P11 link 2 (r/azores, r/cuboulder). Four of them add steps to scripts, as the defining members do.

Core rooms (5), with no selected change, placed by their codes alone at the nearest centre in the code columns: r/pgang (8 concepts; verdict composes-with-residue), r/quq (8 concepts; verdict composes), r/sakartvelo (5 concepts; verdict composes), r/UMiami (2 concepts; verdict composes), r/wario (1 concept; verdict cannot-tell). Their placement rests on 1 to 8 coded concepts each and is weak. r/wario is one of the form's two rooms whose verdict is cannot tell; the other, r/Braveryjerk, is a thin room.

16. The form test

The constructs. P14 (machine hands), P23 (the chat) and P09 (attack calls), at the fourth-order themes T4-009 (Workarounds), T4-010 (Backstage decision-making) and T4-020 (Repertoire of contention), with P18 (the contest in talk), P17 (coalitions) and the arrows A06, A15 and A16.

The relations. Within each part there is a relation. Scripts need their targets kept in step and their control argued; the chat needs its access kept and its decisions brought back; attack calls are answered, often by a refusal without a reason. Across the parts, a change binds only the placers and running scripts it reaches. But the three parts are not related to each other: their holders overlap at chance (section 14). So the form binds three sets of constructs, each with its own relations, and no relation among the sets.

Is it falsifiable? Within the parts, yes. A room whose scripts ran without anyone keeping their targets, or whose chat's decisions never returned to the thread, would fall outside them. As a form, the claim that the three belong together is already contradicted by the overlap counts.

The four organizing problems. The scripts and the chat bind information provision: a change must reach the running scripts and the placers outside the chat. The scripts bind the allocation of tasks to machines and the question of who may set them. Raiding binds nothing of the four on its own; it is the contest, a remainder the four problems do not name. Division of labour between rooms and reward are left free.

What varies among members. Which of the three a room did. That is the whole of the form's variation, and it is sorted by the tree at the second level.

Result: a grouping, not a form. The form holds three patterns that rooms did apart, at about chance overlap, and no relation joins them. Each pattern binds constructs and relations of its own, and two of them (raiding, B.2; the scripts, B.1.2) are candidate subforms for D6. I report form B as a grouping of the rooms whose work ran behind the thread, as D4a-08c named it.

17. What would make you doubt this is even a grouping

Three things.

First, the cut. 43 of the 113 defining rooms lie nearer another form's centre, more than in form A, and the stability of the cut is about 0.21. Form B is what remains between the other five forms as much as what its rooms share.

Second, my sort of the restrict lines and my mixture rule. One reader sorted 292 lines. And the mixture rule did not foresee the case the counts showed; the answer in section 14 is a description of the counts, not the rule's outcome.

Third, the survival figures, from the record, never from the canvas. The median organizing end is hour 72.30 for the 140 members with one, and the mean aftermath share is 0.0387. The coded work_remained field says kept in 72 members, lost in 42 and silent in 27. These figures are not compared here, and nothing in this account rests on them.

What would undo the grouping: a cut on a different weighting in which raiding and the scripts each form a group of their own and the chat falls into another form.