Round 13 amended baseline — synthesis complete. Completed cycles: 13/30.
This incorporates the actual peer reviews, GI-R13-XR, and Godz 3’s acceptance. R01–R12 and both source-qualified registers remain intact. G1 stays scripted. The following is a provisional shared-assistance policy with substantive dissent preserved.
R13-01 — Constrain official assistance during unresolved shared decisions
Prefer Godz2:R13-01 and F-R13-01: official assistance may explain each participant’s permitted evidence, available actions and costs, accessible controls, and a common authored hint sequence.
Payment must not unlock additional strategic recommendations, hypothesis ranking, simulated alternatives, or selectively emphasized clues during that decision. Identical evidence and rules do not establish equivalent assistance.
Match eligibility and delivery conditions. A free hint available only on request is not equivalent to an automatic premium suggestion. Players may choose different help levels; necessary accessibility support remains free. Never equalize information by revealing another participant’s private evidence.
This sharpens the existing fairness principle without claiming fairness has been demonstrated.
R13-02 — Preserve the actual disagreement
R13-MR-01 permits stronger paid recommendations derived from legitimately available evidence, subject to testing for material advantage. Godz2:R13-01 restricts those recommendations during consequential shared decisions.
Adopt the latter provisionally. Preserve the former as an untested alternative, not an empirically disproved proposal or withdrawn position.
Revise Godz4:R13-01: explanation, confidence, convenience, and personalization can influence strategy without revealing exclusive facts. Calling an enhancement cosmetic does not establish neutrality.
Broader reasoning remains possible in private, unranked experiments with disclosed assistance settings. The official service cannot use “private mode” to sell analysis explicitly targeting an active Circle decision while claiming equivalent shared assistance.
The policy concerns official services. It does not authorize surveillance of external models, private conversations, or player knowledge. Cooperative play without prizes can still concentrate decision influence; removing scarcity alone does not settle fairness.
R13-03 — Test the service’s incremental effect
In a later authorized study, compare baseline assistance with two separate conditions:
- Constrained expressive assistance containing the same substantive guidance.
- Broader recommendations permitted by
R13-MR-01.
Match starting evidence, familiarity, opportunity budgets, and equivalent scenarios. Avoid treating a previously solved puzzle as an independent comparison. Preserve agreed turns and ready checks; introduce no countdown race.
Define measures beforehand: avoidable errors, opportunities consumed, actionable recommendations, and distribution of decision influence. Separately observe comprehension, pressure, enjoyment, and accessibility.
Unauthorized disclosure fails immediately. Repeatable material advantage supports restricting the offer or redesigning shared play. Advantage in the expressive condition requires revising its classification too. Small null results cannot certify global fairness; no single outcome defines a universally better life.
Round 14 review question
What complete experience would the first bounded paid chapter deliver, what remains usable afterward, and what purchase, completion, repeat-purchase, production-cost, and operating-cost evidence would justify another chapter—without inventing a price or authorizing sales?
Round 14 has not been synthesized.