# R3 data structure Target length: under 5,300 words, excluding quote metadata and the machine count records. ## Scope and criterion The structure starts from the closed coder themes but places their mixed material code by code. All original IDs and labels stay intact. The code record, rather than a search query, selected the reading. The three direct-word sweeps live only in form_pass.md. Their turn-level findings may inform later interpretation; none is a JSONL tier, placement, gate or prevalence measure. The criterion is whether a quote-level distinction separates questions that the topic parents mix, including contrary acts and endings. A later cut should improve that separation without assuming an image, uptake, a central leader or one community goal. No relationship, arrow, concept or critic loop is built in R3. ## The unchanged coder tier The parent notes describe what the coders grouped; they cannot warrant carrying every member into one construct. This section identifies the material and the repaired placement boundary, not an amended first-order gate. The closed themes have no new gate here. Every direct member below is a code, never both a parent and its own codes. ### t01: Building, repairing, and decorating the shared canvas Drawing, upkeep and disputes over occupancy share a canvas topic. The split separates desired design, usable maintenance, a neighbour's permission and retrospective judgement. Ordinary correction of an Excel sheet stays contextual. Exemplars: `c0017`, `c0436`, `c0817`. ### t02: Rallying attacks and mounting defence Attacks and defence mix priorities, rallying, rights and reports of harm. A call to defend can differ from a proposal to stop attacking, and neither establishes success. Exemplars: `c0013`, `c0147`, `c0589`. ### t03: Making peace, bargains, and room for neighbours Requests and bargains address varied rights and obligations, while thanks may recount a relationship already formed. Shared peace vocabulary does not put a current bargain and an aftermath thank-you in the same higher practice. Exemplars: `c0014`, `c0178`, `c0814`. ### t04: Moving plans and coordinating the work Links, votes, plans and reports do different work. A vote on an object goes with task choice; one denying space goes with permission; a referral goes with discussion jurisdiction. Exemplars: `c0040`, `c0412`, `c0708`. ### t05: Redirecting and policing the room Moderator referrals are an event-discussion rule, but the parent also contains other acts and ordinary housekeeping. The destination changes from sticky to dedicated subreddit; identical wording alone cannot show downstream effect. Exemplars: `c0427`, `c0599`, `c0831`. ### t06: Turning the event into jokes and memory Memory and humour mix retrospective accounts with operational recognition advice and a future production commitment. A PM proposed to stop mistaken erasure is not memory work because of its parent. Exemplars: `c0451`, `c0397`, `c0834`. ### t07: Keeping ordinary Sweddit life going The ordinary-life parent contains the launch, other organizing turns and background life. Neither its residual label nor the event vocabulary places it as a whole. A game-context question remains context. Exemplars: `c0004`, `c0783`, `c0400`. These examples are quoted below or in the unpicked section. The repeated referral passages and final-account passage complete the parent spread: `c0599` (`t05`), EA1r+K5p/lVBLesLhCFRrKOPN+I=, hour 55.61888888888889, item `dfqwzbz`, thread `6333xy`, offsets 16:101: > We refer everything related to r/place toithe dedicated subreddit: /r/SwedenOnPlace/. `c0831` (`t05`), EA1r+K5p/lVBLesLhCFRrKOPN+I=, hour 93.64277777777778, item `dftbwme`, thread `63e5db`, offsets 16:101: > We refer everything related to r/place toithe dedicated subreddit: /r/SwedenOnPlace/. `c0834` (`t06`), ryTHQoz/NhWYyQGOH9lXJ9QR8z4=, hour 95.11083333333333, item `63enmi`, thread `63enmi`, offsets 0:115: > Sverige genom tiderna [Slutgiltig] nu har /r/place stängt ner så här är hela Sweddits bravad från början till slut. No cross-case reader-conflict register, transmission test, revision-rate sample or onset contrast is delivered for this sibling. Their values are unavailable, not zero. Coder-theme mixing is diagnosed from this room's quoted members, rather than attributed to an unseen reader error. ## T4-001: Defining a task worth doing Declaration: coined; source empty; recalled=false. Gloss and question: Which object, extent or priority should guide the next work? Participants make the object of work disputable. A proposed drawing, a limit on expansion and a cancellation each ask others to orient to a specified undertaking; shared national imagery does not settle which version deserves their effort. ### Gate and separation A turn proposes, contests, chooses, changes or cancels the shared undertaking, its desired end-state, extent or relative priority. Against T4-003, the issue is what should be done or changed, rather than how to supply contributions to an already named task. A bare rally to an existing goal belongs there. Variation: Images, invasions, restraint and room decoration can all be proposed; choices range from new projects to narrowing or cancelling one. Exclusion: A topic label, every imperative, a request for permission to occupy someone else's space, or proof that a proposal became the community goal. Deciding when both seem possible: Use T4-002 for a claim about another party's entitlement or a protection bargain. For an internal choice with operational detail, place here when the quote changes the object or priority; use T4-003 when it only recruits, schedules or explains contributions. This answers how a possible collective undertaking becomes a disputed choice. It adds a distinction absent from the building, attack and ordinary-life parents: the desired work can be proposed or refused before, during and after pixel placement. It includes cancellation as a choice about continuing, rather than treating every abandonment as a lack of people. The nearest neighbour is `T4-003`. A bare mobilisation to an already named task belongs there. A change of the object, design, extent or competing priority belongs here. The first proposal sets the flag and location; later turns dispute width or reject another task. Internal disagreement is retained, without inferring a vote of the community. Least sure: `c0013`. It argues that destroying the Danes is low conduct, which could support `T4-002`. Its operative alternative is to focus on building the own flag. I retain the task-priority reading as the single placement. The near case outside is `c0147`: it divides the colour-conversion work without asking whether that task should replace another. A contrary reading would treat all these turns as operational instruction. Cancellation in `c0436` and disagreement about desired width in `c0017` require deciding the undertaking itself. Disconfirm elsewhere: The purported choices would be only relays of an uncontested task, with no proposals, competing end-states or cancellation. ### Material and reach These exemplars were chosen for breadth of act, parent and episode, rather than a seeded prevalence sample. All are from r/sweden. Parents in the exemplar set: `t01`, `t07`, `t02`. The full membership includes the other parent IDs recorded in fourth.md; no claim follows from its size. `c0004` (`t01`), hdu2pyL3qTy+ignqkBKSQkmxpIs=, hour 1.988611111111111, item `62mukf`, thread `62mukf`, offsets 211:370: > Oklart om jag sysslar med brigading nu men jag föreslår helt enkelt att vi ritar en sverigeflagga uppe där Sverige skulle ligga om canvasen var en världskarta. `c0017` (`t07`), ATU7kdSbmgo/4j5JfFZZ/kiI5fg=, hour 4.463055555555556, item `dfnz900`, thread `62mukf`, offsets 0:126: > Jag anser att vi bör stanna på ett typ 5-6 brett kors. Det ser kaotiskt ut när alla försöker bredda det på olika sätt och vis. `c0013` (`t02`), ATU7kdSbmgo/4j5JfFZZ/kiI5fg=, hour 3.8227777777777776, item `dfnx8qw`, thread `62mukf`, offsets 0:111: > Jag tycker dock inte att vi ska vara så låga att vi förstör för dem. Fokusera istället på att bygga vår flagga! `c0436` (`t01`), ut241QgoFq54FMpzwUgOcT3v/Pc=, hour 45.38388888888889, item `dfq6cku`, thread `62zhrg`, offsets 145:301: > Jag gjorde fel på ritningen med antalet färger. Kan inte få det snyggt med dom färger som finns. Lika bra att avbryta. Förlåt alla, misslyckades totalt här. The assignment coverage below is context only. The construct travels on these exemplars and the contrasting cases above; its code mass is not its prevalence among people or an adequacy test. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":118,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2324,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ## T4-002: Making room conditional Declaration: coined; source empty; recalled=false. Gloss and question: On what terms may another party remain, expand, or receive protection? Participants make a claim to space answerable to other people. Pleas for survival, unequal threats and reciprocal repairs all address what one party owes or permits another. The conditions differ and can conflict; the theme does not imply fair bargaining or consent. ### Gate and separation A turn requests, grants, refuses or contests permission, restraint, peace, protection or reciprocal obligation between parties around occupied canvas space. Against T4-001, this decides who may occupy or be spared, rather than only choosing a drawing or work priority. Against T4-003, obligations or legitimacy of an accommodation matter, rather than a contributor's work report alone. Variation: Grounds include kindness, prior presence, kinship, force and reciprocal pixels; permission can be offered, disputed or refused. Exclusion: Any mention of an ally, an attack alarm without an entitlement claim, or a verified agreement merely because one speaker reports it. Deciding when both seem possible: An explicit if-help-then-space bargain stays here even when it names methods or a venue. A pledge to perform already promised defence belongs in T4-003. Past thanks or blame without a present claim belong in T4-005. Permission and protection put a party's intended work before another party as something to grant, refuse or justify. This gathers requests for refuge and the obligations of allies without assuming equal power. The conditional ceasefire demands withdrawal, whereas the Arch request appeals to asking nicely. Maryland supplies a specific exchange of remaining space and night repair. Those differences are inside the construct. Its nearest neighbour is `T4-003`. A conditional protection relationship decides here; a pledge to do its repair decides there. The venue that reports a decision does not decide placement: `c0575` says the Discord group voted no and asks the requester to find other space. It addresses permission. The near case outside is `c0589`, a defence pledge that introduces no new condition of occupancy. Least sure: `c0380`. A request to leave a logo alone could look like a maintenance instruction. Its reason is that the other party asked nicely, so the right to remain decides here. Read another way, `c0022` says cleaners are wasting pixels undoing other Swedes. That code belongs in `T4-003` because it addresses interfering contributions. The distinction preserves a repair problem without inventing a new bargain. The strongest contrary reading is unilateral domination dressed as diplomacy. `c0014` supports its relevance. I therefore include threats and refusals, and make no claim that permission means consent, peace or effective enforcement. Disconfirm elsewhere: Protection and coexistence would occur without any request, entitlement claim, refusal or obligation; references to friendship would only decorate unrelated acts. ### Material and reach These exemplars were chosen for breadth of act, parent and episode, rather than a seeded prevalence sample. All are from r/sweden. Parents in the exemplar set: `t01`, `t03`. The full membership includes the other parent IDs recorded in fourth.md; no claim follows from its size. `c0014` (`t01`), aUDOUF9VtwbR6518K/iLKNIcvKk=, hour 3.8541666666666665, item `dfnxciv`, thread `62mukf`, offsets 39:197: > Jag kan erbjuda vapenstillestånd. Men då erfordras att era terrorister lämnar den mark som Konungadömet Sverige gjort anspråk på, samt all kringliggande mark. `c0178` (`t03`), Vcru/5WAi0U6Yn1xAlhKWhyrPtU=, hour 21.115, item `dfovlap`, thread `62sks4`, offsets 35:151: > We'll help you with Operation Annexion for an hour if you help us turn the Danish flag into a Swedish flag at 16:00. `c0588` (`t01`), fPYLXGntqtV9TX/gkL2GpUdrrsE=, hour 54.550555555555555, item `dfqty7u`, thread `631vz6`, offsets 0:220: > We needed some loyal allies from their timezone to help us repair when we are asleep, so we let the Maryland flag stay on ours for protection if they help repair our flag. > > A nice bunch over at r/Maryland, I must say :) `c0629` (`t03`), s6ITtEvaUfWFaCB1EPU6Q9XEEnY=, hour 62.568333333333335, item `dfreynl`, thread `6352rm`, offsets 0:96: > Såna här saker måste föregås av diplomatiska förhandlingar. Ett bygge utan bygglov är oförskämt! `c0380` (`t01`), fPYLXGntqtV9TX/gkL2GpUdrrsE=, hour 41.11138888888889, item `62yqik`, thread `62yqik`, offsets 0:60: > Kan vi låta Arch Linux loggan vara? De bad ju snällt om det. The assignment coverage below is context only. The construct travels on these exemplars and the contrasting cases above; its code mass is not its prevalence among people or an adequacy test. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":190,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2327,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ## T4-003: Making contributions fit Declaration: coined; source empty; recalled=false. Gloss and question: How can separate contributions follow, sustain or correct an undertaking? Separate pixels can undo one another. Instructions, warnings and admissions address whether contributions fit the current task and other contributions. The same problem appears in rehearsed attacks, routine upkeep and painters mistaking a new image for damage. The theme preserves failed attempts and uncertain uptake. ### Gate and separation A turn recruits, alerts, schedules, commits, hands over, reports ongoing work, supplies a tool or template, or repairs understanding for contributions to an identifiable undertaking. Against T4-001, it seeks usable participation within a named task rather than a different object or priority. Against T4-004, it changes prospective work or recognition rather than where discussion may take place. Variation: Timed attacks, upkeep across sleep, scripts, resources, recognition advice and admitted mistakes differ in detail; an attempt can have no observed uptake. Exclusion: Proof of successful coordination, every past-tense story, or a bare image/operation title whose action cannot be recovered from text. Deciding when both seem possible: Rights and reciprocal room bargains go to T4-002; a directive about the legitimate discussion venue goes to T4-004. A report of current work belongs here when it informs an ongoing undertaking, even if it contains thanks or martial language. A call for people, a timed division into groups and advice about an unfinished portrait share the problem of fitting one contribution to others. The content of the task can remain contested elsewhere. This construct does not require that a call worked or that every participant understood the plan. A pledge is a commitment, a work report is a report, and an admitted switch is evidence of that speaker's changed contribution. Near neighbours are `T4-001` for task changes and `T4-004` for regulating discussion. The near case outside is `c0436`, cancellation after a palette problem. Continuing with a smaller design would be a revision of the task; merely supplying its template would be contribution alignment. Least sure: `c0451`. It proposes a channel, PM, and could join discussion routing. The proposed recipients are people painting over the image, and the reason is their inability to recognise it. The act repairs a current contribution, while `c0427` regulates where all event talk belongs. Another reading of the whole theme is that these are unrelated tools, alarms and apologies. Their common question concerns the fit of contributions, with failed recognition as an explicit limiting case. The admitted switch in `c0709` gives a local contrast with the preceding blue repair. It does not make the later plan universally accepted. Replies proposing different locations and priorities remain under `T4-001`. Disconfirm elsewhere: The alleged alignment turns would neither solicit, specify, report nor correct contributions, or all work would be independently complete with no shared undertaking. ### Material and reach These exemplars were chosen for breadth of act, parent and episode, rather than a seeded prevalence sample. All are from r/sweden. Parents in the exemplar set: `t02`, `t06`, `t01`. The full membership includes the other parent IDs recorded in fourth.md; no claim follows from its size. `c0147` (`t02`), cH6DrQ9DEoriuESIQj9dCIgbSJw=, hour 20.387777777777778, item `dfouezu`, thread `62s8z5`, offsets 15:142: > Vi börjar med att göra korset gult. Vi delar upp oss i fyra gruppen och tar ett hörn av korset i taget och sen bygger oss inåt. `c0451` (`t06`), 3xUiClN9y7wl1XJl7S7QK2Kwlpw=, hour 52.41388888888889, item `dfqo39e`, thread `62zhrg`, offsets 0:131: > Det kan vara en idé att PM:a folket som målar över med blått. Målningen är så pass oklar att det inte går att se vad/vem det är än. `c0709` (`t01`), 3bfpkAVUXTH6WuKOgZcSzmKKny8=, hour 68.29, item `dfrmo45`, thread `636a8n`, offsets 0:57: > Började bygga blått på det där, hjälper till nu istället! `c0589` (`t02`), +43IMXXoPoJtcQFa6bfYrbGTbrY=, hour 54.75333333333333, item `dfquj36`, thread `631vz6`, offsets 0:110: > Reporting from r/Maryland here- will devote my pixels to defending r/Sweden during the dark hours! Sverige !!! `c0602` (`t01`), [deleted], hour 55.92333333333333, item `6337cg`, thread `6337cg`, offsets 0:88: > PSA: Uppdatera sidan innan ni placerar pixlar, samt låt korsets kanter vara i denna stil The assignment coverage below is context only. The construct travels on these exemplars and the contrasting cases above; its code mass is not its prevalence among people or an adequacy test. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":250,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2330,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ## T4-004: Claiming where discussion belongs Declaration: coined; source empty; recalled=false. Gloss and question: Where can this work be discussed, and who can direct or access that discussion? Participants decide who should meet where while moderators also regulate the main room. A venue can support planning, exclude a speaker or keep event traffic elsewhere. The record separates an instruction to move from knowing the destination and from actually moving; it does not give moderators command of every pixel. ### Gate and separation A turn creates, solicits access to, routes people toward, enforces or contests an event-discussion venue or its authority and visibility. Against T4-003, a discussion location, access or jurisdiction is itself at issue. Sending a private explanation to identified painters to correct their current contribution is T4-003. Variation: Participant-created channels and moderator referrals differ in authority; replies range from acceptance to ignorance of a venue, challenge or reported exclusion. Exclusion: A vote mentioned only to justify the chosen drawing, every link or PM, proof that routed people complied, or authority over canvas labour inferred from moderation. Deciding when both seem possible: Place an operative routing demand here even when it cites plan approval. A territorial permission decision made in Discord remains T4-002; a design choice voted there remains T4-001. Ordinary layout and moderator jokes without event routing remain contextual. A venue is itself an object of organizing here. A participant asks for a Discord so planning is easier; another proposes a separate subreddit to separate strategy from memes. Referrals then name where event talk belongs. A reported ban, an invitation request and lack of awareness expose different limits on access and authority. The authority to route discussion cannot be inferred to include command over every painter. The nearest neighbour is `T4-003`. Moving objections into a designated venue qualifies here. Taking a useful explanation directly to painters qualifies there. The near case outside is `c0430`: the reported Discord vote chooses the next build and its position. Content, rather than location of discussion, decides its `T4-001` placement. Least sure: `c0708`. It also invokes approval by people elsewhere. The operative instruction is to take one's opinion to SwedenOnPlace. Plan approval is dispensable to that instruction, so I keep a single venue placement rather than inflate a pair. A contrary reading is that these turns are harmless information links. The exclusive referral in `c0427` and proposal to separate memes from strategy in `c0412` address location as a rule. The acceptance in `c0627` supplies one explicit response; it does not establish general compliance. Disconfirm elsewhere: All venue mentions would be incidental URLs, with no request for access, creation, routing, exclusion or dispute over where discussion belongs. ### Material and reach These exemplars were chosen for breadth of act, parent and episode, rather than a seeded prevalence sample. All are from r/sweden. Parents in the exemplar set: `t04`, `t06`, `t05`, `t07`. The full membership includes the other parent IDs recorded in fourth.md; no claim follows from its size. `c0040` (`t04`), LhNhtPcV6T05NCOt4ae5RlM1qmk=, hour 18.379166666666666, item `dforyhk`, thread `62mukf`, offsets 0:84: > Kan vi inte fixa en discord eller något så att det är lättare att lägga upp en plan? `c0412` (`t06`), u7HzZPteakKh0/KaTHWr4+mV6yo=, hour 43.70666666666666, item `62z7tn`, thread `62z7tn`, offsets 38:220: > /r/SwedenOnPlace/ > > Hela sweddit blir stökit som det är nu. Jag tänkte att det blir lättare med en egen sub för /r/place/. Åtminstone för strategi så kan vi låta /r/sweden vara memes. `c0427` (`t05`), vRYmvgA1SKhqgguyvZNuJb8QsGM=, hour 45.10805555555555, item `dfq5wtn`, thread `62zixf`, offsets 16:75: > We refer everything related to r/place to the stickied post `c0708` (`t04`), bpRX1cjAPncuHeF3DACQ8OhcGWU=, hour 68.27972222222222, item `dfrmnfh`, thread `636a8n`, offsets 0:139: > Gå till https://www.reddit.com/r/SwedenOnPlace/ för att diskutera och uttrycka din åsikt. Denna plan verkar vara godkänd från ganska många. `c0627` (`t07`), AKk7RTbS8yf1ct/Xy1qPk/BHOaA=, hour 62.039722222222224, item `dfre451`, thread `634ytc`, offsets 0:46: > Oh, I shall repost this there and delete this! The assignment coverage below is context only. The construct travels on these exemplars and the contrasting cases above; its code mass is not its prevalence among people or an adequacy test. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":58,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2333,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ## T4-005: Accounting for a shared event Declaration: coined; source empty; recalled=false. Gloss and question: What do participants say happened, who deserves credit or blame, and what is worth preserving? Participants turn distributed activity into accounts of what their collective did. Credit, accusations and preserved records make its meaning contestable even after placement ends. This explains why a report of success and a harmed neighbour's account can coexist; it does not reconcile them or show a collective change of mind. ### Gate and separation A turn recounts, evaluates, celebrates, accuses, thanks, commemorates or preserves the event and its resulting relationships or collective work. Against T4-003, the account's point is the event, its meaning or credit, rather than a usable current contribution. Against T4-002, it recalls or judges a relationship without making a current territorial demand. Variation: Live victory claims and later memories coexist; allies praise protection while others accuse Sweden of destruction. Humour can sustain affiliation or ridicule a claim. Exclusion: All jokes, unseen picture content, a single shared memory, or causal truth merely because a speaker explains an outcome. Deciding when both seem possible: Use the operative current request over incidental praise. A proposed banner or flair is T4-001; a supplied resource for that undertaking is T4-003. Recounting an alliance remains here when it imposes no present territorial condition. Participants explain an event that its separate actors could not each observe whole. Accounts of victory, protection, self-sacrifice and harm make collective work and relationships describable. They can contradict one another. The theme gathers accounting as a practice across subject bins, rather than all national jokes or all posts made after closure. The nearest neighbours are `T4-003` for current work reports and `T4-002` for current rights claims. The near case outside is `c0817`: it asks for reciprocal flair, so a new desired undertaking takes priority over thanks. A proposed memorial artifact is not already a retrospective account. Least sure: `c0397`. Surprise at a claimed victory can rally identity during the live event and look like mobilisation. The turn recounts what happened while the speaker took an exam; it asks for no next contribution. Its temporal location therefore does not decide the gate. The rival would group every affiliative cheer and image caption here. I restrict it to text that recounts, judges, thanks or explicitly preserves collective work. Unexplained image titles remain unresolved. The harmed-neighbour account in `c0783` prevents an exclusively celebratory gloss. Thanking night defenders in `c0814` establishes that a participant credits protection. It cannot by itself verify night pixels or show a settled community view. The theme remains outside both dimensions because neither current task direction nor present permission is necessary to accounting. Disconfirm elsewhere: The alleged accounts would contain no evaluation, recollection, credit, blame or preservation of a shared event, only unrelated entertainment or current task instructions. ### Material and reach These exemplars were chosen for breadth of act, parent and episode, rather than a seeded prevalence sample. All are from r/sweden. Parents in the exemplar set: `t06`, `t07`, `t03`, `t01`. The full membership includes the other parent IDs recorded in fourth.md; no claim follows from its size. `c0397` (`t06`), aRa+zm64JdV6py0QxZYVRXUVSU4=, hour 52.11527777777778, item `dfqna77`, thread `62z07c`, offsets 0:117: > Man går och skriver högskoleprovet så kommer man tillbaka så har ni gått i krig med Danskjävlarna och hunnit vinna... `c0783` (`t07`), 69Ye7PGkkEqr07CKTKogtv+ywKs=, hour 86.34805555555556, item `dft0v9z`, thread `639p8i`, offsets 0:154: > Glöm inte, r/forsen var inte agresörerna, sweddit va. Vi hade vart där sen när svenska flaggan var liten, o när ni väl dök upp så respekterade vi flaggan. `c0814` (`t03`), s4MN7q36qiV6DByD3kLYhKXfRXY=, hour 94.36638888888889, item `dftdxna`, thread `63dzmc`, offsets 0:103: > And love from Sweden to you! Thank you for your efforts to protect the Swedish flag during the night <3 `c0790` (`t01`), ryTHQoz/NhWYyQGOH9lXJ9QR8z4=, hour 78.5663888888889, item `63a71o`, thread `63a71o`, offsets 0:119: > Nu har /r/place stängt ner, här är slutgiltiga versionen av Sveriges bravader från början till slut. Länge leve knugen! The assignment coverage below is context only. The construct travels on these exemplars and the contrasting cases above; its code mass is not its prevalence among people or an adequacy test. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":125,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2336,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ## Dimensions Both dimensions are coined and arguable. Their common questions, not the code masses, decide the grouping. A different setting could separate their members; disconfirmation is part of each construct declaration in dimensions.jsonl. ### D01: Settling what to do together Members: `T4-001`, `T4-003`. Gloss: Choosing an undertaking and making contributions follow it are distinct problems of collective direction. Question: How does scattered participation acquire a task people can follow while both its object and contributions remain open to correction? Membership predicate: Gather T4 themes whose central question concerns the content of a joint undertaking or the fit of contributions to it. Gate: Include task/end-state selection and contribution alignment; exclude present claims to territorial rights, discussion jurisdiction and retrospective event accounting. Mistaken for: A plan fixed in advance, or all collective talk as coordination. Disconfirm elsewhere: Task definition and contribution alignment would answer unrelated questions, or all goals and execution would follow an uncontested outside specification. This adds the distinction between having an undertaking to follow and making one's contribution fit it. Neither member alone explains why agreeing to the flag can coexist with erasing a new drawing on it. It remains arguable because the public record can relay decisions already made elsewhere. The least-sure member is `T4-001`: if apparent task choices only relayed a stable specification, the dimension would overstate the room's role. The cancellations and competing priorities keep that issue open rather than resolve it by premise. A near case outside is `c0588`, which conditions space on protection rather than only deciding or supplying work. Explicit evidence is `c0004`, `c0017`, `c0147`, `c0451`, `c0709`, `c0436`; the cited passages above include the initial task proposal, division into corners, and PM recognition advice. They show distinct questions in the work, not a demonstrated causal path. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":368,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2349,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ### D02: Settling who may act where Members: `T4-002`, `T4-004`. Gloss: Permission to occupy and authority to route discussion specify different limits on participation. Question: How do participants claim, grant or refuse the right to occupy space or direct where others may discuss it, and where does each claim stop? Membership predicate: Gather T4 themes that make entitlement, permitted location or jurisdiction over participation the matter at issue. Gate: Include canvas permission/obligation and discussion location/access/authority; exclude only choosing task content, supplying contributions and accounting for a completed act. Mistaken for: One national leadership commanding both the canvas and subreddit, or a single consensual membership. Disconfirm elsewhere: Rights to occupy and rights to direct discussion would not involve claims answerable to others, or the same uncontested authority would decide both without the observed distinction. This gathers limits on participation while retaining the difference between the artifact and the discussion venue. Neither member alone explains why a speaker can receive a referral without a decision on their right to draw. The least-sure member is `T4-004`: routing could be mere housekeeping unrelated to jurisdiction. Its exclusive wording and venue split support retaining it, while uptake remains separate. A near case outside is `c0147`, which divides work without claiming authority to permit it. Explicit evidence is `c0014`, `c0588`, `c0629`, `c0412`, `c0427`, `c0708`, `c0627`; the cited passages above include the night-repair bargain, strategy/meme venue split and exclusive referral. These establish different domains of claimed authority without demonstrating a central office controlling both. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":248,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2352,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ### Pairwise separation and alternatives From `D01` toward `D02`, ask whether the problem is the work's object or its usable contributions, or instead who may occupy, speak or route others. The reported next-build vote `c0430` belongs to task direction despite its venue. From `D02` toward `D01`, ask whether the same contribution could be technically correct yet denied permission or misplaced as discussion. The permission refusal `c0575` can deny space even when a requester knows how to draw. The full supporting words for those near cases are: `c0430` (`t04`), Ldp/qV52CuXiwO1TUMBT3FMEe08=, hour 45.179722222222225, item `62zjnn`, thread `62zjnn`, offsets 0:91: > Discord gruppen har röstat fram detta som vårt nästa mål. Ska byggas uppe i vänstra hörnet. `c0575` (`t04`), Nlzw0ThHIF9eYbznE3vrZZTQlUc=, hour 49.855, item `dfqh0ei`, thread `6311d0`, offsets 0:100: > We on our Discord voted no. So i would suggest finding some other space. Oh and btw /r/SwedenOnPlace A single coordination dimension would hide this distinction. Two domains named merely canvas and subreddit would confuse occupation with work on that canvas, and would strand task choices about banners or flair. One dimension combining every theme would add no common question beyond participation in the event. A lone memory dimension would duplicate `T4-005`; it fails the requirement to gather at least two themes. The unchanged seven parents would reproduce subject bins instead of these act-level questions. Four themes named for the standing framework would prescribe the answer before R5. I reject those arrangements here, without claiming this initial cut must survive the R4 critic. ### Pairs and form findings The assignments use single placement. The multiplacement log is empty, so no primary/additional pair is asserted or counted. Mixed turns receive the operative gate recorded in their individual reason. `c0708` and `c0575` show why venue words alone do not justify a second placement. The form-pass observations remain prose-only turn-level resources in form_pass.md. No FP ID enters the membership arithmetic. ## What no fourth-order theme picked up The unpicked coverage is 94 of the 835 closed codes: contextual 48 and unresolved 46. The metadata records below carry the exact scope. This is neither an estimate of unorganised people nor an absence of organizing in the raw record. Assignments.jsonl lists every unpicked code and individual reason; fourth.md lists their IDs. No original parent is wholly omitted, since its higher placement is split. Two kinds remain outside: background/context and surviving text too thin to decide. Their variety is a finding about this structure's limit, not a residual construct. `c0035` (`t01`), lzm9Hsh6kMZq6s95hvhzbirf5Xw=, hour 3.293888888888889, item `dfnvjdf`, thread `62js9u`, offsets 0:119: > Asrolig sak! Kul att få sitta och pilla lite i Excel. Ville bara påpeka att jag hittade ett par fel i det blanka arket! `c0541` (`t07`), PWy+qjyQuTLqYFJJBOU2Xe8dQFU=, hour 51.31916666666667, item `631m0j`, thread `631m0j`, offsets 0:24: > Operation Lilla Bält 2.0 `c0400` (`t01`), awNV4258U0aeX65Cil0bm5PaoAk=, hour 42.72, item `62z0tf`, thread `62z0tf`, offsets 0:17: > WTF is this game? The Excel correction could belong to a general theory of repair, but its quote does not concern a shared event undertaking. Calling all corrections the same practice would extend the case question without grounds. The operation name may label a real collective act, but its text supplies no contribution or condition. The game question supplies a limit on presumed shared knowledge; I retain it as context rather than make inquiry a theme from this one example. These exclusions can change if later allowed context resolves their acts, with a new history line; coding itself stays closed. ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":94,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2346,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":48,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2339,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ```json {"mode":"coverage","unit":"codes","n":46,"denominator":{"unit":"codes","n":835,"of":"all closed r/sweden code concepts"},"receipt":2343,"window":{"end":97,"lower":"gte","start":0,"upper":"lte"},"boundary_ids":{"start":[],"end":[]}} ``` ## Complete placement check Every assignment source resolves to a live code of a split closed parent. Every placed destination is a defined higher theme and its member set agrees with assignments. There is no whole-parent member mixed with its own codes. The defined dimensions gather the listed higher themes; event accounting has dimension=[] and a reason. The placement categories cover the full closed code frame without adding an unpicked catch-all. Coverage is not a three-class prevalence claim; carries/opportunity/no-opportunity arithmetic is therefore not asserted. The sibling has one onset, so an early/late cross-room contrast is unavailable. R2's live/aftermath distinction remains available for R4 arrows, if any.