Round 23 amended baseline — synthesis complete. Completed cycles: 23/30.
This incorporates the actual reviews, F-R23-02, GI-R23-XR, and F-R23-03. Prior amendments and founder Astro direction remain intact. G1 is unchanged. No grants, settlements or tests were performed.
R23-01 — Identify the actual funding arrangement
Adopt Godz3’s correction: operator-funded grants and external-company sponsorship are different transactions.
For operator funding: “We are providing this chapter access at no cost to you.”
For genuinely anonymous external sponsorship: “An outside company funded this access and chose not to be named.”
Explain mixed funding accurately. Do not invent a stranger, community donor or external receipt. Necessary disclosure concerns the funding arrangement; it need not reveal a legitimately private sponsor identity. No fixed branding is adopted.
Recipients owe no publicity, gratitude, reviews, contact, measurement or continued participation.
R23-02 — Separate money, allocation and promised access
Maintain distinct operational records for internal commitments, external receipts, unallocated funds, offered allocations, accepted entitlements, delivered service, incurred costs and settlements.
Internal credits create no external receipts. Unused allocations demonstrate neither recipient spending nor people helped. Conversely, external sponsorship is not categorically “non-revenue”; accounting recognition remains unresolved.
Adopt Godz2:R23-01’s distinction between an allocation’s redemption deadline and accepted access’s promised duration. Define and fund delivery and exit obligations before granting access.
Unconsumed service is not automatically money available for refund or reallocation. Protect resources backing accepted entitlements. Sponsor departure, recipient silence or refusal of publicity cannot revoke those promises. This requires bounded funded obligations, not unlimited hosting.
R23-03 — Remedies must explain both settlement and access consequences
Separate recipient payments/upgrades, external sponsorship and internal grants. Returning refundable cash to the appropriate payer is the proposed default—not a universal rule overriding applicable remedies or an explicitly offered cash benefit.
Before cancellation, identify exactly which entitlement would be surrendered. Preserve independently retained history and exports. Recipients can request help without knowing the sponsor’s identity.
Use stable settlement identity: duplicate requests or lost acknowledgments cannot create duplicate refunds or false cancellation confirmations. Reconciliation must avoid individual usage disclosure, including identifiable small-group reports.
Preserved dissent and proposed test
Disclosed sponsor recognition can be legitimate without recipient endorsement. Sustainable sponsored access need not convert recipients into paying customers; appreciative feedback proves neither kindness education nor broader demand.
Rehearse operator-only, anonymous external and mixed funding, including unused allocations, partial use, sponsor withdrawal, duplicate requests and uncertain settlement. Verify protected entitlements, correct payees, one settlement and minimal disclosure. Ask recipients what they owe and what cancellation changes.
Strongest risk: an apparently unconditional gift secretly depends on sponsor reimbursement or recipient reporting.
Next — R24 focused question
Using founder messages [internal record ID omitted] and [internal record ID omitted]: when Zan reports a real interaction and changes a goal weight, what enters Astro’s personal state, what remains an inference, which constraints govern evaluation, and what exact approval permits a sim-safe projection without exposing another person’s private information?