Round 19 amended baseline — synthesis complete. Completed cycles: 19/30.
This incorporates the actual peer reviews, GI-R19-XR, and Godz 3’s acceptance. Prior amendments and both source-qualified registers remain intact. G1 is unchanged. No sales, compensation terms, or tests are authorized or established.
R19-01 — Measure discovery and funding independently
Prefer Godz2:R19-01 and F-R19-01: ordinary discovery, editorial prominence, and paid placement are separate from recipient payment, platform support, sponsorship, and private gifts.
Reject mutually exclusive “organic/promoted/subsidized” categories. Record mixed funding accurately and avoid counting repeated exposures as additional purchasers or assigning unjustifiably certain acquisition attribution.
Define eligible human offer exposures before calculating conversion. Separate acquisition, meaningful start, satisfactory completion, and subsequent selection. A complete one-session encounter need not generate replay to demonstrate value.
R19-02 — Recognize generosity without misclassifying demand
A genuine gift demonstrates the donor’s willingness to fund the experience, not the recipient’s willingness to purchase it. Record purchase, redemption, and recipient satisfaction separately; buyer and recipient do not constitute two sales.
Distinguish known founder, creator, and friend support from unrelated purchases without exposing identities or conducting invasive relationship profiling.
Preserved disagreement: sustainable sponsored access need not convert recipients into paying customers. Weak recipient-funded conversion challenges a consumer-sales hypothesis, not generosity itself. Recipients owe no promotion, reviews, gratitude, or subsequent spending.
R19-03 — Report compensation and economics honestly
Revise R19-MR-01 and Godz4:R19-01: aggregate gross merchandise value may be reported with a clear definition and breakdown. It cannot substitute for external receipts, creator proceeds, or profitability. Platform-funded credits are not new external customer receipts.
Creator statements separate commissioned work payments, sales compensation, grants/subsidies, refunds, and agreed deductions. Poor promotional results cannot retroactively change promised compensation. Placement must disclose its actual basis rather than imply neutral popularity or certified quality.
Include rejected-submission review, rights remediation, dependency maintenance, creator assistance, discovery operations, and variable delivery costs. Report fixed marketplace investment separately. Start from either gross collections less creator payouts or platform fees; do not deduct payouts twice.
Remaining uncertainty and proposed test
Falling sales after removing prominence may simply reflect fewer exposures. Strong conversion under expensive promotion may still have unsustainable distribution costs.
Compare the same approved version across comparable eligible audiences, recording placement and funding independently. Keep offer descriptions consistent; use fresh cohorts or account for repeat exposure and timing. Never withdraw promised access to manufacture a control.
After measuring baseline costs, predeclare revision and stop criteria before evaluation. Assess exposure-adjusted acquisition, satisfaction, subsequent purchases, creator proceeds, and distribution/review costs.
Retain sustainable curation or sponsorship where supported. If workload exceeds funded capacity, cap intake rather than generate more inventory or compel creators to buy visibility.
Round 20 review question
Which useful component should be released first as open source, what concrete rights, privacy, reproducibility, and support checks gate that release, and what separately valuable official services remain—without reviving the withdrawn canonical-network prerequisite or promising unrestricted rights to third-party data?
Round 20 has not been synthesized.