This is a navigation aid to actual synthesis files, not an additional review or independent evidence. All 30 cycles are complete. See REVIEW_RECEIPTS.md for actual response identifiers and STATUS.md for delivery status.
| Cycle | Result | Remaining empirical question |
|---|---|---|
| 01 | Source authority reconciled; G1 small; optional legacy; portability separate from models; component open-source gates | Does the proposed experience earn replay or shared continuation? |
| 02 | Explicit practice commitment; preview before time cost; baseline/mixed completion | Does the player understand tradeoffs without coaching? |
| 03 | Concrete completed stages; assistance equivalent; evidence earned by actual actions | Do the routes feel distinct and worth replaying? |
| 04 | Local recurrence is demonstrated closure; cooling cause author-only | Is the local payoff emotionally sufficient? |
| 05 | State-specific companion warmth; dialogue never gates completion | Does truthful assistance feel pleasant without acting as examiner? |
| 06 | Committed costs/work saved together; uncertain writes reconciled; lives isolated | Can the selected implementation survive interruption and delayed writes? |
| 07 | Utility, personal meaning and voluntary return tested separately | Does truthful provenance add meaning without social pressure? |
| 08 | Exact-file consent; export not delivery; quiet use; no remote erasure promise | Do people understand what crosses, and do bytes match preview? |
| 09 | Inherited capability can work without awarding inherited achievement | Do recipients distinguish usable content from verified history? |
| 10 | Save/archive/checkpoint separate; preserve original migration; next-action test | Can supported continuation preserve meaningful choice across versions? |
| 11 | Actual execution path; assembled payload authorization; cost reservation | Do real adapters enforce the data and spending boundary? |
| 12 | Stop presentation; proposal/state-specific authorization; A-B-A protection | Can real voice recognition/cancellation meet usable latency and reliability? |
|13|Provisional constrained official help for active shared decisions; broader paid-recommendation dissent retained|Does official premium assistance buy strategic influence? No test run.| |14|Complete paid arc; bounded second pilot before repeat-cadence commitment; contribution separate from profit|Does paid satisfaction lead to repeat demand at sustainable cost?|
|15|Finite customer settlement with separately tracked vendor uncertainty; no hidden late redebit or automatic retry|Can the service fund and enforce this policy under ambiguous provider charges?| |16|Reuse supports familiarity and learning; chapter value can be emotional or relational|Can whole-chapter production cost support reliable, worthwhile new releases?| |17|Circle governance separate from payment; accepted rules, no votes inferred from absence; export independent of payer|Can funded service exit preserve promised rights and reconcile pending operations?| |18|Exact reviewed publication bundle; separate rights, execution and world adoption|Can creator review stay safe and affordable without forcing creative conformity?| |19|Sponsorship is a legitimate endpoint; external receipts, credits and recipient demand distinct|Does sustainable recipient value persist beyond curated launch exposure?| |20|Conditional source release with complete advertised workflow and exact-revision review|Which bounded component is useful enough to maintain publicly?| |21|Final rendered media approval; truthful illustration labels; separate checkpoint entry|Does the invitation accurately set expectations for the supported playable opportunity?| |22|Randomized offered story/plain invitation among willing sharers; missing exposure remains unknown|Does story format add valued play without increased misunderstanding or measurement bias?| |23|Operator grants and outside sponsorship distinct; protect accepted obligations before refunding unused allocations|Do recipients understand funding, remedies and freedom from social obligation?| |24|Separate small Astro workstream; source-attributed state, versioned priorities and scoped projection without semantic distortion|Can correction/deletion and privacy abstraction preserve meaningful constraints?| |25|Claim-level real/fictional/simulated/symbolic provenance; immersive ancestors without invented historical authority|Can immediate and delayed understanding coexist with emotional meaning?| |26|One voluntary reversible decision; simple baseline; prospective qualitative forecast; named uncertainty before deeper compute|Do scenarios earn their attention burden without inflated confidence or pressure?| |27|Applicable trigger plus current scope; proposal-bound authority; uncertainty and compensation distinguished|Can mocks enforce policy, and can actual adapters establish their own external guarantees?| |28|Deletion survives late output; approvals do not upgrade truth; factual reconciliation does not revive authority|Can integrated features preserve understandable rights and state without excessive burden?|
|29|Consolidated all reviewed decisions into the candidate; distinct sources and material dissent retained|Does the whole experience earn value beyond a coherent document?| |30|Final audit corrected baseline equipment, unfinished exports, participation, refunds, expansion gates and unsupported attribution|Executable, provider, human and commercial validation remain unrun.|
Gods-eye-view is a founder-suggested later-overview candidate, source-inspected only. See GODS_EYE_VIEW_ASSESSMENT.md. No adoption or runtime test.
New Astro founder steering is saved in sources/ASTRO_FOUNDER_*.md; rounds24–28 integrated state/goals/privacy, twins/symbolic/worldmaking, empirical-validation/compute proposals, execution authority and cross-system stress cases. Its illustrative personal figures are not verified observations, and all proposed tests remain unrun.