R3 structure

Target length: under 9,000 words, including attributed excerpts.

Basis and scope

This structure is static. It proposes no arrow or causal loop. It preserves every coded label and membership and uses optional theory names only as prior prompts, not decisions. All constructs here are coined, with no borrowed literature and no claim to originality. The source is one room. Model pass is 0, a pre-model structure marker; no R4 pass exists. The requested runtime remains GPT-6.1 Sol medium; exact runtime binding belongs to the controller rather than this gateway.

The full-code sweeps are in form_pass.md. Their turn-unit findings prompt distinctions here: FP-01 separates visible assent from a specified task; FP-02 prevents military vocabulary deciding a grouping; FP-03 limits assumed authority; FP-04 limits assumed shared understanding. They are not tier members, gates or arithmetic. No count claims how often a practice occurs. Each grouping travels on exemplars. Reading coverage is 295/295 closed codes (receipt 2486), hours 0 through 97 inclusive, with no endpoint codes. {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":295,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":295,"of":"All closed r/czech codes, hours 0 through 97 inclusive"},"receipt":2486}

The coding supplies descriptive themes rather than an independent gate instrument. Below, their immutable notes state their boundaries; the quoted placement gate is the new T4 gate, not a retroactively invented coder gate. No coder-conflict packet exists in this room stage. Therefore there are no imported coder disagreements or fabricated paired coder words. The alternative readings below are my comparisons. Every coder theme has one assignment or contextual status, without splitting or multiple placement. There is no onset comparison across rooms in a one-room record.

Coder-theme boundaries and exemplars

t01: rallying people to build, repair and defend the flag

Coded description:

These codes all recruit, join, repair or defend the Czech work; they vary from first calls and late arrivals to alarms, refresh instructions and direct hands-on repair.

Nearest coder theme: t09. Separating test and variation: An act joins or requests hands rather than offers a venue. A repair call is not proof of repair.

Best placement is T4-001. Its placement gate is:

The material recruits, routes or equips contributions to ongoing collective work, including automated repair and its constraints.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0002, bu0QkQ0Op1A+Q3HpiE2otNxhacc=, hour 4.497777777777777, item dfnzcvf, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2167):

Someone started to draw our flag in the top middle section. I think it would be cool if we all took care of it against griefers and such.

c0004, YjelzzlIbjdgrAh0Hne+232+3II=, hour 13.788055555555555, item dfom7zu, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2170):

I saw the flag and as a half Czech American, I'm joining in.

c0050, X1ClNDhUhjL2L0G9ogsr3NlmUeQ=, hour 42.568888888888885, item dfq2usw, thread 62yo19 (cite receipt 2172):

Help me secure the northern border, some light blue folks are invading it, thanks.

t02: working out the flag's borders, wedge and proportions

Coded description:

These codes work out how a common flag can be made legible and coordinated; what varies is the border, colour, slope, sequence and difficulty of the plan.

Nearest coder theme: t03. Separating test and variation: A border or proportion constrains an existing flag rather than adds a new symbolic motif. Pixel precision varies from exact slope to vague correctness.

Best placement is T4-002. Its placement gate is:

The material specifies, proposes, rejects or revises the content or extent of a common canvas undertaking.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0013, j0tJG5IBEQD8nJVfNfkQJPV5A8k=, hour 22.71472222222222, item dfoysvh, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2175):

Correctly, the slope should be 2/3, or for every 3 pixels the line moves to the right, it should go 2 pixels up or down.

c0016, SIIeU33NOAVvq2E4HmPyDyo6kU4=, hour 24.83416666666667, item dfp42hw, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2178):

The problem is we're uncoordinated; some want to recolor the light grey to the correct white, the right border isn't clear, etc.

c0021, bu0QkQ0Op1A+Q3HpiE2otNxhacc=, hour 26.891666666666666, item dfp96ow, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2181):

Let's make the border two pixels wide and then always fill the inner lines with the color for the flag.

t03: putting beer, hearts, words and Czech pictures on the canvas

Coded description:

These codes propose, make or refine recognisably Czech additions; they vary among beer, hearts, words, mottos, maps, cartoons and other pictures.

Nearest coder theme: t08. Separating test and variation: Recognizable additions include cross-group motifs but need not establish the particular shared road. Designs can be proposed, adjusted or abandoned.

Best placement is T4-002. Its placement gate is:

The material specifies, proposes, rejects or revises the content or extent of a common canvas undertaking.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0036, [deleted], hour 39.61277777777778, item 62ygvz, thread 62ygvz (cite receipt 2184):

Let's do a pixel art of a beer next to our flag. Maybe even write /r/czech somewhere around it.

c0084, FPpyjHFJN0nQ9vOo0Prd38d0ik0=, hour 44.07138888888889, item dfq4h20, thread 62yu6u (cite receipt 2187):

connect right up to the beer flag, so it looks like the two nations are having beer with each other.

c0223, byY0tJ4qb5hW2qJdzzG6ePIz2IA=, hour 66.62083333333334, item dfrk2ft, thread 635q9n (cite receipt 2190):

Dutchies have asked us to abandon this plan, please do not follow it!!!

t04: choosing whom to invade, erase or spare

Coded description:

These codes choose or dispute a target for expansion or erasure; positions vary from calls to invade to restraint, disguise and objections that someone else's work would be destroyed.

Nearest coder theme: t06. Separating test and variation: Choosing erasure or restraint differs from bargaining with the affected maker. Objection is part of contested target choice, not evidence erasure stopped.

Best placement is T4-002. Its placement gate is:

The material specifies, proposes, rejects or revises the content or extent of a common canvas undertaking.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0039, X1ClNDhUhjL2L0G9ogsr3NlmUeQ=, hour 40.8125, item dfq15kl, thread 62yo19 (cite receipt 2193):

We should not use fixed borders, to allow simple expansion

c0122, rG9ybMozWX+PHpdYNAtOWYDtRdQ=, hour 46.94444444444444, item dfq9deg, thread 6301mc (cite receipt 2196):

The Hammer and Sickle is a symbol of murder, totality and occupation for many Czechs. Let's take it down.

c0124, Igb+3px/yG8WiUCDjVnQhe0n/To=, hour 47.14361111111111, item dfq9u5d, thread 6301mc (cite receipt 2199):

You are cruel. Some people worked on that.

t05: asking neighbours for help and paying help back

Coded description:

These codes request, answer, promise or repay help between groups; they vary in whether aid is for a flag, repair, defense, relocation or an alliance being honored.

Nearest coder theme: t07. Separating test and variation: Requesting or promising aid differs from testing a standing pact. A return can be explicit or absent; neither promise nor reported pixel guarantees effective aid.

Best placement is T4-003. Its placement gate is:

The material requests, bargains for, promises, refuses or tests help, room or restraint across groups.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0031, ja8rfDa6gcBvltmZPNZqFqQyKVg=, hour 29.810277777777777, item 62vs59, thread 62vs59 (cite receipt 2202):

My Czech brothers, please help us over in /r/Armenia defend our flag from the Dutch in /r/place

c0127, Igb+3px/yG8WiUCDjVnQhe0n/To=, hour 47.629444444444445, item dfqb03m, thread 6309rl (cite receipt 2205):

It would be nice if you could give us a hand since we were nice to you (and stopped fighting).

c0197, YjelzzlIbjdgrAh0Hne+232+3II=, hour 58.56472222222222, item dfr5nu8, thread 633jg2 (cite receipt 2208):

If I notice your flag needs repair and ours is all good I'll help out with yours.

t06: negotiating room with neighbouring pictures

Coded description:

These codes bargain over crowded canvas room with smaller neighboring works; they vary among borders, moving, transparency, apology, refusal and reciprocal protection.

Nearest coder theme: t07. Separating test and variation: A concrete collision over room differs from a continuing pact's credibility. A move may be proposed, conceded or refused; group size constrains its feasibility.

Best placement is T4-003. Its placement gate is:

The material requests, bargains for, promises, refuses or tests help, room or restraint across groups.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0052, mKdZ9HCZIj1Y2LadOYWFkY+rUpQ=, hour 42.746944444444445, item dfq317t, thread 62yo19 (cite receipt 2212):

Please don't take us over at /r/Mindcrack! Would it be possible to expand over to the left instead of right?

c0103, YjelzzlIbjdgrAh0Hne+232+3II=, hour 45.604166666666664, item dfq6pqx, thread 62zd7d (cite receipt 2214):

I won't encroach on your stuff anymore. My apologies.

c0087, flUcgcZ/QJJr29uZapvrRMemcGY=, hour 46.089444444444446, item dfq7lhs, thread 62yu6u (cite receipt 2536):

Yeah. We are relocating right above Turkey.

t07: making, doubting and repairing pacts with neighbours

Coded description:

These codes make and test relations with neighboring groups; they vary among truces, votes, diplomats, warnings, distrust, denial of rogue attacks and plans brought back from elsewhere.

Nearest coder theme: t06. Separating test and variation: A relation's authority and reliability are at issue beyond a particular overlap. Confidence varies from coexistence reports to fear and distinctions between organized allies and rogues.

Best placement is T4-003. Its placement gate is:

The material requests, bargains for, promises, refuses or tests help, room or restraint across groups.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0142, PTxl7kSwkDqF/vlpRFssTBSd9MI=, hour 52.38611111111111, item dfqo0j5, thread 630t6f (cite receipt 2221):

We've put it to a vote. We will coexist peacefully with you.

c0178, TFrRIBz61bmesCH9fsLOyajz/uI=, hour 52.690555555555555, item dfqotgl, thread 631zsm (cite receipt 2224):

How can we be sure you won't attack once you surround us from 3 sides?

c0294, SUfQJWFfvXMleZ6O6U7PIMgofKU=, hour 52.468333333333334, item dfqo8j5, thread 630t6f (cite receipt 2227):

There's truth to it though, some people on our discord will want to annex the Czech flag tomorrow morning, but everyone else will try their very best to prevent this from happening.

t08: building and defending Czech-Slovak roads and shared work

Coded description:

These codes build or defend work explicitly shared with Slovakia, especially D2 and the Czechoslovak highway; they vary from design and relocation problems to defense and border hearts.

Nearest coder theme: t05. Separating test and variation: The concrete road connection is being made or defended, not just another group's help requested. A road's mobility and a solo artist's mobility differ.

Best placement is T4-002. Its placement gate is:

The material specifies, proposes, rejects or revises the content or extent of a common canvas undertaking.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0090, iMvXOhxM02UNrjtVVpBcBbW+ql8=, hour 42.973055555555554, item dfq393o, thread 62z23h (cite receipt 2231):

radi by sme nadviazali spoluprácu medzi našimi bratskými národmi a postavili k Vám diaľnicu.

c0095, iMvXOhxM02UNrjtVVpBcBbW+ql8=, hour 50.28638888888889, item dfqi83n, thread 62z23h (cite receipt 2234):

getting everyone to suddenly follow a new plan is near impossible

c0257, d/2k4Aj8ktprmgZfNBOvAxDYs+U=, hour 69.30555555555556, item dfrot7z, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2237):

Fix it fast and quick to restore the full connection between our glorious nations!

t09: taking coordination to Discord, polls and dedicated threads

Coded description:

These codes move or concentrate coordination in named venues; they vary among Discord, polls, a dedicated subreddit, private-message access and the moderator's megathread redirects.

Nearest coder theme: t01. Separating test and variation: The act offers or enforces a place to coordinate, not hands. Invitation varies from an optional dedicated venue to a moderator's restriction; uptake is unknown.

Best placement is T4-001. Its placement gate is:

The material recruits, routes or equips contributions to ongoing collective work, including automated repair and its constraints.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0072, IrqnxMNFyBPiJZHRBrybrYT3K0s=, hour 47.28888888888889, item dfqa6ep, thread 62yo19 (cite receipt 2240):

I created discord channel for people participating in Place. Slovaks welcome too!

c0157, 2rOxYACXv7RSMG5JcfZtO4An+BI=, hour 50.951388888888886, item 631gyt, thread 631gyt (cite receipt 2243):

I have created /r/placecz, so feel free to use it for related things

c0255, 6YX7NM2569sejhxZXePL8Y7DZn8=, hour 68.8425, item 636ju3, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2246):

To keep this sub civil and organised, you can post all new submissions related to /r/place here.

t10: using bots to hold or remake the work

Coded description:

These codes describe people using automated placement or adapting work around it; they vary between overnight repair, mutual bot use and declaring a manual proposal too late against scripts.

Nearest coder theme: t01. Separating test and variation: Repeated placements use automation, not only manual volunteers. Bots can be reported as repair capacity or as constraints that block redesign; no automated performance was observed directly.

Best placement is T4-001. Its placement gate is:

The material recruits, routes or equips contributions to ongoing collective work, including automated repair and its constraints.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0196, 7hkGF8N74yPHiIpS8MdZj2NWOgg=, hour 58.33722222222222, item dfr4ype, thread 633jg2 (cite receipt 2249):

many people here just running selfrepairing bots over night. I have 3 working on Czech flag

c0210, 7hkGF8N74yPHiIpS8MdZj2NWOgg=, hour 66.23027777777777, item dfrjl3c, thread 635iwj (cite receipt 2252):

We are using bots too, its not problem to actualize it.

c0220, d6sLGKDlNoeW5HyhAG/OowgvRUI=, hour 69.13305555555556, item dfroexe, thread 635mnw (cite receipt 2255):

Well, it's too late now. The void (4chan scripters) has been overtaken by orange (Dutch scripters).

t11: explaining r/place to people arriving late

Coded description:

These codes make the event intelligible to people who missed or still did not understand it; they vary from a direct answer to bewilderment after many posts or even after the ending.

Nearest coder theme: t09. Separating test and variation: Asking what the event is differs from routing work. A link can answer without recruiting. The quoted record preserves confusion, not a demonstration of failed community socialization.

Contextual, with no higher placement: Late explanation and bewilderment limit shared understanding but do not by themselves arrange work or acknowledge a contribution.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0192, InojUNdq6ZGQiqJ4ZX+yHts04b8=, hour 53.86944444444445, item 632iob, thread 632iob (cite receipt 2258):

What is that picture game I see here?

c0245, [deleted], hour 67.68027777777777, item 6367i5, thread 6367i5 (cite receipt 2261):

Coming back here after few days to countless r/place posts without any clue what's going on...

c0279, hO25ShMTn1a7KqE2oAzKrzDY7Hs=, hour 76.19694444444444, item dfs9dn0, thread 638c1g (cite receipt 2264):

I still don't know what that was all about.

t12: thanking neighbours and celebrating shared work

Coded description:

These codes thank participants or turn completed joint work into friendship and celebration; they vary among foundation thanks, alliance praise, shared jokes, songs and post-event gratitude.

Nearest coder theme: t05. Separating test and variation: Acknowledgment differs from arranging the next contribution. Foundation thanks and alliance praise concern work already credited, while songs and off-topic thanks are peripheral to that practice.

Best placement is T4-004. Its placement gate is:

The material acknowledges contributions, assesses results or marks and documents an ending.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0025, bu0QkQ0Op1A+Q3HpiE2otNxhacc=, hour 28.558333333333334, item dfpd62z, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2267):

Děkujeme za základní kámen pixel. Bez tebe by jsme tu teď nebyli.

c0265, eeMA8c44x0FJFVBFLEAiNpd6UOA=, hour 74.6775, item dfs4sri, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2270):

thank you guys for being good neighbours even though we were kinda dickish

c0286, 8WgqStU4SfAILMY2/ahzp/4q+N0=, hour 76.20611111111111, item 639a46, thread 639a46 (cite receipt 2272):

WE WERE HONORED TO BE YOUR ALLY, MUCH LOVE FROM DUTCHIES <3

t13: trying to carry the flag into r/place copies

Coded description:

These codes try, report or dispute carrying r/place into replacement canvases; they vary from sharing an all-year copy to recruiting, rejecting repetition and painting a new flag.

Nearest coder theme: t09. Separating test and variation: The canvas opportunity is replaced, not merely the communication channel. Invitation, refusal and a finished flag do not jointly establish collective transfer.

Best placement is T4-005. Its placement gate is:

The material offers, pursues or disputes making r/place work on a replacement canvas.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0288, sWDaLrUKJHzIwyX2EKrmu92i+pw=, hour 82.45, item 63bg75, thread 63bg75 (cite receipt 2279):

Anyone want to join me in making czech flag at Place knockoff?

c0291, DqsHUNg+c27ot53ATVDk+7K8QiU=, hour 91.49888888888889, item dft7dpn, thread 63bg75 (cite receipt 2281):

Doing it again just seems pointless, just like trying to redo r/thebutton

c0292, sWDaLrUKJHzIwyX2EKrmu92i+pw=, hour 95.99833333333333, item dftj5z3, thread 63bg75 (cite receipt 2284):

I've already managed to paint whole flag there.

t14: taunting and insulting across borders

Coded description:

These codes use accusation, historical provocation or personal mockery across group boundaries; they vary from framing claims and national taunts to insults over whose work matters.

Nearest coder theme: t04. Separating test and variation: Mocking another person or nation differs from directing erasure. The accusation, historical provocation and insult do not share a demonstrated organizing effect.

Contextual, with no higher placement: Taunting, attribution and insults have no single demonstrated organizing practice; some sustain boundaries, others merely mock.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0029, El+lWZJwKJCPa3r3vPlAAss7ako=, hour 29.788888888888888, item 62vrrm, thread 62vrrm (cite receipt 2286):

Ireland trying to frame russia, check the username, hes irish

c0170, PZNSKseqn+pMmpQvoCpRWGEHnkM=, hour 51.920833333333334, item 631ttt, thread 631ttt (cite receipt 2528):

A clearer result: the Dutch Final Solution to the Czech Question

c0240, K4rTEae46zBe73/c3DFNQe8skB8=, hour 68.11638888888889, item dfrmct6, thread 6365ry (cite receipt 2533):

I love the Dutch people but I hope you personally fall of your bicycle tomorrow.

t15: marking the end and looking back at the canvas

Coded description:

These codes announce, document or personally assess the finished event; they vary among correcting ending images, sharing a timelapse, congratulating people and calling the event procrastination.

Nearest coder theme: t12. Separating test and variation: An explicit ending or documentation differs from crediting a particular contributor. Corrections and personal enjoyment need not express a shared view or verify the work's survival.

Best placement is T4-004. Its placement gate is:

The material acknowledges contributions, assesses results or marks and documents an ending.

This is not a universal claim about every short code in the bundle. Incidental forms stay visible without duplicating the whole theme.

This theme travels on exemplars, not a three-part prevalence count. The quotes below range over the practice and a limit; a short or deictic span carries only what its words say.

c0275, X1ClNDhUhjL2L0G9ogsr3NlmUeQ=, hour 73.64777777777778, item 638c1g, thread 638c1g (cite receipt 2295):

/r/place has ended, good job everyone!

c0267, DqsHUNg+c27ot53ATVDk+7K8QiU=, hour 75.23027777777777, item dfs6h89, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2298):

The most complete timelapse I could find

c0278, tqqt2uwalUGdxM+eju8ZVHSolUM=, hour 75.73305555555555, item dfs7ycj, thread 638c1g (cite receipt 2300):

I really enjoyed this kind of procrastination !

Higher themes

The themes answer five distinct questions. Joining resources, deciding the object, negotiating dependence, recognizing contributions and testing repetition cannot replace one another. The singleton restart theme remains because it exposes portability as a question not answered elsewhere, not because every coder theme must be lifted. The full practice story is in fourth/fourth.md; the gates and exemplars here make the cuts checkable.

T4-001: Making hands, channels and repair available

Declaration: coined, source empty. Gloss: Recruiting people, directing them to coordinating spaces and arranging repeated repair.

The shared practice is making a contribution available to ongoing work: a person joins, a venue gathers requests, or a script repeats placements. These are different means of availability, not interchangeable tasks. A channel invitation does not show uptake, and an automated hold can obstruct a new plan.

Question: How can scattered contributors become reachable and keep contributing without one task allocator?

Members: t01, t09, t10. What varies: Self-selected manual help to moderator-directed posting and automatic repair; offered to reported action.

Gate condition:

The material recruits, routes or equips contributions to ongoing collective work, including automated repair and its constraints.

Discriminator: Availability and access to contributions, rather than the content of the design or permission from a neighbour.

Not this theme: A plan specification alone, a pact alone, or a completed-work report.

When both seem possible: Place means of participation here; place decisions about the work's shape in T4-002 and bargaining over another group's actions in T4-003.

The gate is one practice, not a required two-part move. Near case outside: c0013 specifies a slope but supplies neither hands nor access.

Least sure member: t10. Bots make repair available without present hands, but they are not people assembled in a venue. Retain them as a distinct means of persistence, not as proof of a shared authority.

Exemplars chosen for breadth and depth across t01, t09, t10 where available. All come from r/czech. The singleton has no second coder theme; no breadth is invented. Each quote below meets the gate on its own words, as a request, claim or report, not proof of execution.

Material: coder theme t01, coded label rallying people to build, repair and defend the flag. Position: core. Why here: Availability and access to contributions, rather than the content of the design or permission from a neighbour.

c0002, bu0QkQ0Op1A+Q3HpiE2otNxhacc=, hour 4.497777777777777, item dfnzcvf, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2167):

Someone started to draw our flag in the top middle section. I think it would be cool if we all took care of it against griefers and such.

Material: coder theme t01, coded label rallying people to build, repair and defend the flag. Position: core. Why here: Availability and access to contributions, rather than the content of the design or permission from a neighbour.

c0004, YjelzzlIbjdgrAh0Hne+232+3II=, hour 13.788055555555555, item dfom7zu, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2170):

I saw the flag and as a half Czech American, I'm joining in.

Material: coder theme t09, coded label taking coordination to Discord, polls and dedicated threads. Position: core. Why here: Availability and access to contributions, rather than the content of the design or permission from a neighbour.

c0072, IrqnxMNFyBPiJZHRBrybrYT3K0s=, hour 47.28888888888889, item dfqa6ep, thread 62yo19 (cite receipt 2240):

I created discord channel for people participating in Place. Slovaks welcome too!

Material: coder theme t09, coded label taking coordination to Discord, polls and dedicated threads. Position: core. Why here: Availability and access to contributions, rather than the content of the design or permission from a neighbour.

c0255, 6YX7NM2569sejhxZXePL8Y7DZn8=, hour 68.8425, item 636ju3, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2246):

To keep this sub civil and organised, you can post all new submissions related to /r/place here.

Material: coder theme t10, coded label using bots to hold or remake the work. Position: core. Why here: Availability and access to contributions, rather than the content of the design or permission from a neighbour.

c0196, 7hkGF8N74yPHiIpS8MdZj2NWOgg=, hour 58.33722222222222, item dfr4ype, thread 633jg2 (cite receipt 2249):

many people here just running selfrepairing bots over night. I have 3 working on Czech flag

Dimension: D01

Disconfirmation elsewhere: In another setting, the coded acts could occur without the shared practice described here; linked contrary acts would require recutting rather than assuming this bundle.

T4-002: Choosing a workable common mark

Declaration: coined, source empty. Gloss: Arguing over the shape, extent, additions and shared objects that people should make.

Participants turn a recognizable flag into contested instructions about what to place, keep, remove or connect. Technical correctness, recognizable pictures, hostile targets and a shared road all specify the object of work. They vary in precision and legitimacy; holding them together does not imply that a common decision followed.

Question: How does wanting a flag become a disputed but actionable object rather than a settled goal assumed in advance?

Members: t02, t03, t04, t08. What varies: Pixel geometry to symbolic additions and erasure; a national object to a road connecting flags; workable consensus to competing proposals.

Gate condition:

The material specifies, proposes, rejects or revises the content or extent of a common canvas undertaking.

Discriminator: What the undertaking should be, rather than supplying contributors or obtaining another group's accommodation.

Not this theme: Any use of national imagery, any insult, or a neighbour pact without a work specification.

When both seem possible: Use this gate for the proposed object or its constraints; use T4-003 for the practice of bargaining with another group. The closed theme stays whole at its best explanatory gate.

The gate is one practice, not a required two-part move. Near case outside: c0197 offers conditional aid without deciding the mark to make.

Least sure member: t08. A shared road could be read primarily as neighbour cooperation. Its placement here preserves the concrete connection being designed and repaired; reciprocal promises remain in T4-003.

Exemplars chosen for breadth and depth across t02, t03, t04, t08 where available. All come from r/czech. The singleton has no second coder theme; no breadth is invented. Each quote below meets the gate on its own words, as a request, claim or report, not proof of execution.

Material: coder theme t02, coded label working out the flag's borders, wedge and proportions. Position: core. Why here: What the undertaking should be, rather than supplying contributors or obtaining another group's accommodation.

c0013, j0tJG5IBEQD8nJVfNfkQJPV5A8k=, hour 22.71472222222222, item dfoysvh, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2175):

Correctly, the slope should be 2/3, or for every 3 pixels the line moves to the right, it should go 2 pixels up or down.

Material: coder theme t03, coded label putting beer, hearts, words and Czech pictures on the canvas. Position: core. Why here: What the undertaking should be, rather than supplying contributors or obtaining another group's accommodation.

c0036, [deleted], hour 39.61277777777778, item 62ygvz, thread 62ygvz (cite receipt 2184):

Let's do a pixel art of a beer next to our flag. Maybe even write /r/czech somewhere around it.

Material: coder theme t04, coded label choosing whom to invade, erase or spare. Position: core. Why here: What the undertaking should be, rather than supplying contributors or obtaining another group's accommodation.

c0122, rG9ybMozWX+PHpdYNAtOWYDtRdQ=, hour 46.94444444444444, item dfq9deg, thread 6301mc (cite receipt 2196):

The Hammer and Sickle is a symbol of murder, totality and occupation for many Czechs. Let's take it down.

Material: coder theme t08, coded label building and defending Czech-Slovak roads and shared work. Position: core. Why here: What the undertaking should be, rather than supplying contributors or obtaining another group's accommodation.

c0095, iMvXOhxM02UNrjtVVpBcBbW+ql8=, hour 50.28638888888889, item dfqi83n, thread 62z23h (cite receipt 2234):

getting everyone to suddenly follow a new plan is near impossible

Material: coder theme t08, coded label building and defending Czech-Slovak roads and shared work. Position: core. Why here: What the undertaking should be, rather than supplying contributors or obtaining another group's accommodation.

c0257, d/2k4Aj8ktprmgZfNBOvAxDYs+U=, hour 69.30555555555556, item dfrot7z, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2237):

Fix it fast and quick to restore the full connection between our glorious nations!

Dimension: D01

Disconfirmation elsewhere: In another setting, the coded acts could occur without the shared practice described here; linked contrary acts would require recutting rather than assuming this bundle.

T4-003: Securing help and room without commanding neighbours

Declaration: coined, source empty. Gloss: Requesting aid, bargaining over space and testing whether pacts bind participants.

Participants seek another group's contribution or restraint because they cannot simply order it. Requests invoke past help, spatial claims, apology or a reported agreement. Promises, refusal, failed moves and the distinction between organized allies and rogues expose different limits to what a neighbour can deliver. Cooperation and constrained accommodation remain competing readings within the theme.

Question: How is joint work pursued when participants cannot bind all of their own side, much less a neighbour?

Members: t05, t06, t07. What varies: Small artworks to a powerful neighbour; reciprocal help to refusal; promises to failed aid; pact claims to distrust and rogue distinctions.

Gate condition:

The material requests, bargains for, promises, refuses or tests help, room or restraint across groups.

Discriminator: Negotiating another group's conduct or commitment, not merely deciding one's own proposed drawing.

Not this theme: Friendship vocabulary alone, a national taunt alone, or a retrospective thank-you with no live request.

When both seem possible: Place cross-group negotiation here, even if it concerns a drawing. Place the drawing's specification in T4-002 when that is the coded theme's central practice; do not duplicate the entire theme for incidental overlap.

The gate is one practice, not a required two-part move. Near case outside: c0265 recognizes neighbours after work rather than arranging their next act.

Least sure member: t05. Aid need not include explicit bargaining or a return. Retain it because even unconditional aid requires another group's voluntary contribution; do not infer reciprocity from every request.

Exemplars chosen for breadth and depth across t05, t06, t07 where available. All come from r/czech. The singleton has no second coder theme; no breadth is invented. Each quote below meets the gate on its own words, as a request, claim or report, not proof of execution.

Material: coder theme t05, coded label asking neighbours for help and paying help back. Position: core. Why here: Negotiating another group's conduct or commitment, not merely deciding one's own proposed drawing.

c0127, Igb+3px/yG8WiUCDjVnQhe0n/To=, hour 47.629444444444445, item dfqb03m, thread 6309rl (cite receipt 2205):

It would be nice if you could give us a hand since we were nice to you (and stopped fighting).

Material: coder theme t05, coded label asking neighbours for help and paying help back. Position: core. Why here: Negotiating another group's conduct or commitment, not merely deciding one's own proposed drawing.

c0197, YjelzzlIbjdgrAh0Hne+232+3II=, hour 58.56472222222222, item dfr5nu8, thread 633jg2 (cite receipt 2208):

If I notice your flag needs repair and ours is all good I'll help out with yours.

Material: coder theme t06, coded label negotiating room with neighbouring pictures. Position: core. Why here: Negotiating another group's conduct or commitment, not merely deciding one's own proposed drawing.

c0103, YjelzzlIbjdgrAh0Hne+232+3II=, hour 45.604166666666664, item dfq6pqx, thread 62zd7d (cite receipt 2214):

I won't encroach on your stuff anymore. My apologies.

Material: coder theme t07, coded label making, doubting and repairing pacts with neighbours. Position: between. Why here: It tests whether the promised neighbour restraint is credible.

c0178, TFrRIBz61bmesCH9fsLOyajz/uI=, hour 52.690555555555555, item dfqotgl, thread 631zsm (cite receipt 2224):

How can we be sure you won't attack once you surround us from 3 sides?

Material: coder theme t07, coded label making, doubting and repairing pacts with neighbours. Position: core. Why here: Negotiating another group's conduct or commitment, not merely deciding one's own proposed drawing.

c0294, SUfQJWFfvXMleZ6O6U7PIMgofKU=, hour 52.468333333333334, item dfqo8j5, thread 630t6f (cite receipt 2227):

There's truth to it though, some people on our discord will want to annex the Czech flag tomorrow morning, but everyone else will try their very best to prevent this from happening.

Dimension: D02

Disconfirmation elsewhere: In another setting, the coded acts could occur without the shared practice described here; linked contrary acts would require recutting rather than assuming this bundle.

T4-004: Recognizing contributions and making an ending

Declaration: coined, source empty. Gloss: Thanking others, documenting results and assessing the event as completed work.

Speakers make work attributable and assessable through thanks, praise, corrections to its record and explicit closure. Recognition can occur during work as well as after the event. It can acknowledge difficult relations without claiming that everyone agreed or that recognition renewed participation.

Question: What remains publicly shareable when the acts of placing pixels are no longer the present task?

Members: t12, t15. What varies: Thanks during construction to post-event alliance praise; documentary correction to personal enjoyment.

Gate condition:

The material acknowledges contributions, assesses results or marks and documents an ending.

Discriminator: Recognition and retrospective assessment, not a prospective arrangement of help or recruitment to repeat the event.

Not this theme: Proof that work survived, continuing coordination, or a causal reward mechanism.

When both seem possible: A prospective request stays in T4-003 or T4-001; recognition of completed contributions stays here. Later restart proposals stay in T4-005.

The gate is one practice, not a required two-part move. Near case outside: c0288 requests a new undertaking instead of recounting the old.

Least sure member: t15. A timelapse link can be documentation without social recognition. Keep it as making a common ending inspectable in text, without claiming the linked image verifies any outcome.

Exemplars chosen for breadth and depth across t12, t15 where available. All come from r/czech. The singleton has no second coder theme; no breadth is invented. Each quote below meets the gate on its own words, as a request, claim or report, not proof of execution.

Material: coder theme t12, coded label thanking neighbours and celebrating shared work. Position: core. Why here: Recognition and retrospective assessment, not a prospective arrangement of help or recruitment to repeat the event.

c0025, bu0QkQ0Op1A+Q3HpiE2otNxhacc=, hour 28.558333333333334, item dfpd62z, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2267):

Děkujeme za základní kámen pixel. Bez tebe by jsme tu teď nebyli.

Material: coder theme t12, coded label thanking neighbours and celebrating shared work. Position: core. Why here: Recognition and retrospective assessment, not a prospective arrangement of help or recruitment to repeat the event.

c0265, eeMA8c44x0FJFVBFLEAiNpd6UOA=, hour 74.6775, item dfs4sri, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2270):

thank you guys for being good neighbours even though we were kinda dickish

Material: coder theme t12, coded label thanking neighbours and celebrating shared work. Position: core. Why here: Recognition and retrospective assessment, not a prospective arrangement of help or recruitment to repeat the event.

c0286, 8WgqStU4SfAILMY2/ahzp/4q+N0=, hour 76.20611111111111, item 639a46, thread 639a46 (cite receipt 2272):

WE WERE HONORED TO BE YOUR ALLY, MUCH LOVE FROM DUTCHIES <3

Material: coder theme t15, coded label marking the end and looking back at the canvas. Position: core. Why here: Recognition and retrospective assessment, not a prospective arrangement of help or recruitment to repeat the event.

c0275, X1ClNDhUhjL2L0G9ogsr3NlmUeQ=, hour 73.64777777777778, item 638c1g, thread 638c1g (cite receipt 2295):

/r/place has ended, good job everyone!

Material: coder theme t15, coded label marking the end and looking back at the canvas. Position: core. Why here: Recognition and retrospective assessment, not a prospective arrangement of help or recruitment to repeat the event.

c0267, DqsHUNg+c27ot53ATVDk+7K8QiU=, hour 75.23027777777777, item dfs6h89, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2298):

The most complete timelapse I could find

Dimension: D02

Disconfirmation elsewhere: In another setting, the coded acts could occur without the shared practice described here; linked contrary acts would require recutting rather than assuming this bundle.

T4-005: Testing whether the event can be started again

Declaration: coined, source empty. Gloss: Offering replacement canvases, recruiting another flag and disputing repetition.

A replacement makes the technical opportunity recur without establishing that the prior group or purpose transfers. The invitation, skeptical refusal and reported painted flag expose the difference between repeating an object and carrying a shared undertaking forward. This is a singleton higher theme because no other coder theme tests that portability.

Question: What is lost when a recurring technical opportunity is treated as the same social event?

Members: t13. What varies: Sharing a copy to recruiting, rejecting repetition and reporting a completed new flag.

Gate condition:

The material offers, pursues or disputes making r/place work on a replacement canvas.

Discriminator: A new work site and renewed participation, not another venue coordinating the same live canvas.

Not this theme: Evidence that the community collectively restarted or that original coordination continued.

When both seem possible: Use T4-001 for channels of the same undertaking; use this gate when the work site and prospective undertaking are replaced.

The gate is one practice, not a required two-part move. Near case outside: c0157 offers a venue for the same event rather than a new canvas.

Least sure member: t13. The higher label could merely rename copies. The contrast between invitation and rejection supplies an analytical distinction, but the evidence cannot establish a transfer mechanism.

Exemplars chosen for breadth and depth across t13 where available. All come from r/czech. The singleton has no second coder theme; no breadth is invented. Each quote below meets the gate on its own words, as a request, claim or report, not proof of execution.

Material: coder theme t13, coded label trying to carry the flag into r/place copies. Position: core. Why here: A new work site and renewed participation, not another venue coordinating the same live canvas.

c0201, [deleted], hour 63.71111111111111, item 635c9x, thread 635c9x (cite receipt 2276):

Someone made all year round version of /r/place

Material: coder theme t13, coded label trying to carry the flag into r/place copies. Position: core. Why here: A new work site and renewed participation, not another venue coordinating the same live canvas.

c0288, sWDaLrUKJHzIwyX2EKrmu92i+pw=, hour 82.45, item 63bg75, thread 63bg75 (cite receipt 2279):

Anyone want to join me in making czech flag at Place knockoff?

Material: coder theme t13, coded label trying to carry the flag into r/place copies. Position: between. Why here: It disputes restarting rather than merely forgetting to respond.

c0291, DqsHUNg+c27ot53ATVDk+7K8QiU=, hour 91.49888888888889, item dft7dpn, thread 63bg75 (cite receipt 2281):

Doing it again just seems pointless, just like trying to redo r/thebutton

Material: coder theme t13, coded label trying to carry the flag into r/place copies. Position: core. Why here: A new work site and renewed participation, not another venue coordinating the same live canvas.

c0292, sWDaLrUKJHzIwyX2EKrmu92i+pw=, hour 95.99833333333333, item dftj5z3, thread 63bg75 (cite receipt 2284):

I've already managed to paint whole flag there.

Dimension: none. Portability across replacement events is not answered by the means/object distinction or neighbour recognition alone. No second T4 theme supplies a defensible common portability dimension.

Disconfirmation elsewhere: In another setting, the coded acts could occur without the shared practice described here; linked contrary acts would require recutting rather than assuming this bundle.

Dimensions

D01: Aligning available contributions with a disputed object

Coined. Gloss: having willing hands is different from settling what those hands should make. Members are T4-001 and T4-002. The common question concerns making an undertaking actionable, while distinguishing its means from its object. That distinction is unavailable from either member alone: recruits can be willing while helpers damage the intended wedge, and precise plans can remain difficult to follow or revise.

Membership predicate and gate: the higher theme must concern making collective work actionable either by making contributions available or by specifying what contributors should make. Cross-group commitments as such are outside. c0197 promises neighbour aid conditionally and therefore belongs to D02, not to this dimension merely because aid could add hands.

Least sure member: T4-001 includes automation, which may persist without the readership. It belongs as a means of available contribution, but neither bots nor a venue prove one coherent workforce. Confidence is clear for the means/object distinction, not for their effects. These cited contrasts supply evidence:

c0004, YjelzzlIbjdgrAh0Hne+232+3II=, hour 13.788055555555555, item dfom7zu, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2170):

I saw the flag and as a half Czech American, I'm joining in.

c0016, SIIeU33NOAVvq2E4HmPyDyo6kU4=, hour 24.83416666666667, item dfp42hw, thread 62nvbl (cite receipt 2178):

The problem is we're uncoordinated; some want to recolor the light grey to the correct white, the right border isn't clear, etc.

c0095, iMvXOhxM02UNrjtVVpBcBbW+ql8=, hour 50.28638888888889, item dfqi83n, thread 62z23h (cite receipt 2234):

getting everyone to suddenly follow a new plan is near impossible

This dimension could later be compared with literature on organizing contributions and defining work; no literature match is claimed now. Disconfirmation elsewhere: Availability and specification may be inseparable under a single authoritative plan; these two practices would not add explanatory separation there.

D02: Keeping neighbour commitments answerable

Coined. Gloss: people seek help and restraint, then assess who contributed without settling every dispute. Members are T4-003 and T4-004. The common question is how a relation becomes describable as joint work despite unreliable commitments and an ending. Answerable means open to public claim and assessment, not enforceable. Bargaining alone does not show what is later credited, and gratitude alone cannot establish what was negotiated or delivered.

Membership predicate and gate: the higher theme must concern requesting or assessing commitments to joint work across participants, prospectively in bargaining or retrospectively in recognition and ending accounts. Technical specification and mere access are outside. c0255 regulates a venue but does not negotiate or assess a neighbour's contribution.

Least sure member: T4-004. Neighbour gratitude fits clearly, but documentation and personal enjoyment at its edge need not hold neighbours answerable. Its inclusion rests on the public accounting of a jointly credited event, not on treating every ending remark as a pact. Confidence is arguable; if R4 cannot use that distinction without stretching documentation, this dimension should narrow or dissolve. Evidence pairs a request grounded in stopped fighting with a skeptical question and qualified retrospective thanks:

c0127, Igb+3px/yG8WiUCDjVnQhe0n/To=, hour 47.629444444444445, item dfqb03m, thread 6309rl (cite receipt 2205):

It would be nice if you could give us a hand since we were nice to you (and stopped fighting).

c0178, TFrRIBz61bmesCH9fsLOyajz/uI=, hour 52.690555555555555, item dfqotgl, thread 631zsm (cite receipt 2224):

How can we be sure you won't attack once you surround us from 3 sides?

c0265, eeMA8c44x0FJFVBFLEAiNpd6UOA=, hour 74.6775, item dfs4sri, thread 636ju3 (cite receipt 2270):

thank you guys for being good neighbours even though we were kinda dickish

This dimension could later be placed against literature on reciprocal commitment and recognition; no remembered theoretical name is borrowed here. Disconfirmation elsewhere: Retrospective recognition may concern private achievement unrelated to negotiated dependence; then it would not belong with cross-group commitments.

Pairwise separation in both directions

D01 asks whether contributions and a specified object are available. It does not answer whether a neighbour's commitment is credible or later acknowledged; c0013 can specify a slope without a pact. D02 asks what participants can request and credit across dependence. It does not answer how to make a workable wedge or gather a posting venue; c0265 can thank difficult neighbours without specifying any next placement. Objects can be shared and recruits can be outsiders, so internal versus external is not the test. The object/means and commitment/accounting questions are. T4-005 has no dimension because transferring a completed undertaking to a replacement is neither just means/object alignment nor the assessment of existing neighbour commitments.

Alternatives considered and rejected

A single cooperation theme would conflate willing help, failed aid, coerced moves and retrospective thanks. The T artist's inability to move a crowd in c0095, fear in c0178 and abandonment in c0223 prevent success becoming the grouping rule. Shared military or friendship language does not repair that problem.

An internal-work/external-relations split was tempting. It fails because the road specifies a shared object while the flag depends on outsiders. I keep t08 with object-making and t05 with negotiated dependence. Moving all shared art to diplomacy would lose how its actual mark is chosen. Conversely, moving t07 to channels because it reports Discord would lose the practice of testing a pact. No extra placements are necessary to retain those contrasts.

Splitting t10 away from t01 and t09 would sharpen manual versus scripted persistence, but would leave availability of contributions less explicit. The current gate retains that internal variation and scripts' obstruction of redesign. Splitting t15 away from t12 is the strongest remaining alternative: documentation is not gratitude. The common accounting-of-work practice supports retaining the theme provisionally; it does not establish an effect of recognition. The associated D02 remains arguable.

Merging the restart theme with recruitment would confuse a new object with a new communication venue. c0291 contests repeating the event, while c0292 reports one painted flag. A singleton retains that difference without inventing shared uptake. A phase partition into war, cooperation and ending is also rejected: hostile and cooperative positions overlap, and different speakers do not establish collective change of mind.

What no higher theme picked up

The unpicked inventory is t11 and t14, from the full coder-theme register. They carry 11 of the 295 closed codes, coverage receipt 2489, hours 0 through 97 inclusive; there are no boundary codes. This is code coverage of the contextual inventory, not prevalence of confusion or hostility. {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":11,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":295,"of":"All closed r/czech codes, hours 0 through 97 inclusive"},"receipt":2489}

t11, explaining r/place to people arriving late: preserves uneven understanding. It does not by itself supply means of contribution or account for a completed contribution. t14, taunting and insulting across borders: preserves attribution, provocation and mockery without treating them as one organizing practice. Neither is gathered into a residue theme. A contextual code can challenge a model later without a higher placement. The examples below make those limits visible:

c0279, hO25ShMTn1a7KqE2oAzKrzDY7Hs=, hour 76.19694444444444, item dfs9dn0, thread 638c1g (cite receipt 2264):

I still don't know what that was all about.

c0170, PZNSKseqn+pMmpQvoCpRWGEHnkM=, hour 51.920833333333334, item 631ttt, thread 631ttt (cite receipt 2528):

A clearer result: the Dutch Final Solution to the Czech Question

c0240, K4rTEae46zBe73/c3DFNQe8skB8=, hour 68.11638888888889, item dfrmct6, thread 6365ry (cite receipt 2533):

I love the Dutch people but I hope you personally fall of your bicycle tomorrow.

The last item distinguishes Dutch people from a particular person but does not alone establish that an insult preserved the pact. The quoted vocabulary supports a possible boundary reading, not a causal mechanism. No new code was made. Every coder theme is defined and either appears in a T4 member list or this unpicked list; every T4 appears in a defined dimension or carries an empty list and reason. No multiple-placement pairs exist; the empty log is deliberate. There is no cross-case onset contrast and no three-class prevalence partition because no such frequency claim is made.