GameCult/Kalsa
Watch
9
0
Fork
You've already forked Kalsa
 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Add Kalsa examples to prose critic

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Meta Vens 2026-08-23 11:19:35 +02:00
commit 198a14bbc0
3 changed files with 221 additions and 1 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
.epiphany/project-memory.md
View file

@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ database and does not grant canon status to any setting claim.
- `memory-divine-uncertainty` — Gods are powerful, situated witnesses rather than authorial oracles. Divine confidence, memory, doctrine, and testimony remain evidence shaped by binding, rivalry, self-conception, and blind spots.
- `memory-play-canon` — Persistent play creates receipts and canon candidates. Runtime outcomes become shared setting canon only when an owning canonical note explicitly adopts them.
- `memory-independent-lore-review` — Every deepening pass uses seven independent lore critics before repair and after repair: institutional causality; culture and situated knowledge; material life and ecology; history, conflict, and change; Ghostlight play and consequence; AI-isms and prose; and reader experience and navigation. Critics diagnose, the coordinator adjudicates, subject notes own canon, and a no-finding report is valid.
- `memory-ai-ism-judgment` — AI-shaped prose is diagnosed by recurring construction and reading effect, never detector scores, word bans, or authorship claims. The unit of failure may be the corpus: locally polished paragraphs become alienating when different cultures repeatedly pass through the same disclaimer, balanced dispute, institutional repair, and unresolved-invoice sequence. Kalsa's known pressure includes correction theatre, symmetrical wonder-then-cost ledgers, list-clause congestion, repeated frames, checksum conclusions, viewpoint choruses, workshop-dialect leakage, and generic smoothing. Repair the repeated argumentative architecture through source carrier, action, custody, omission, and uneven emphasis; functional lists, deliberate rhetoric, exact uncertainty, and precise technical terms remain protectable.
- `memory-ai-ism-judgment` — AI-shaped prose is diagnosed by recurring construction and reading effect, never detector scores, word bans, or authorship claims. The unit of failure may be the corpus: locally polished paragraphs become alienating when different cultures repeatedly pass through the same disclaimer, balanced dispute, institutional repair, and unresolved-invoice sequence. Kalsa's known pressure includes correction theatre, symmetrical wonder-then-cost ledgers, list-clause congestion, repeated frames, checksum conclusions, viewpoint choruses, workshop-dialect leakage, and generic smoothing. Repair the repeated argumentative architecture through source carrier, action, custody, omission, and uneven emphasis; functional lists, deliberate rhetoric, exact uncertainty, and precise technical terms remain protectable. The version-controlled `AI-Isms and Prose` critic prompt carries an actual Kalsa before/after example and false-positive guidance for every named pressure.
- `memory-public-entry-and-omission` — Public navigation should offer a concrete situated problem before optional surveys. An overview is allowed to omit traditions: shuffling every hidden family into a new order still reconstructs the author taxonomy. Let source-owned mechanisms, witnesses, and disagreements carry ethical limits instead of adding narrator-level correction ledgers and checksum conclusions.
- `memory-situated-divine-evidence` — Public divine knowledge should follow the
record and office responsible for each consequence: covenant origin,

BIN
.epiphany/state/project-memory.cc
View file

Binary file not shown.

220
workshop/review-council/critics/AI-Isms and Prose.md
View file

@ -41,6 +41,226 @@ Use after [[../shared-prompt]].
> em-dash asides, and mechanically parallel sections make reader prose feel
> like a completed form rather than a discovered world.
>
> ## Examples from Kalsa repairs
>
> These are comparison cases, not forbidden constructions or replacement
> templates. A **before** passage is defective because of its function and
> recurrence in the surrounding vault, not because its words are intrinsically
> bad. An **after** passage demonstrates one successful repair; do not teach the
> critic to reproduce its sentence shape everywhere. The full evidence trail is
> versioned under [[../../deepening/passes/KALSA-038-public-prose-saturation|KALSA-038]].
>
> ### Correction theatre
>
> **Before:** the second sentence stages a rebuttal to an imagined reader after
> the first sentence has already made the useful point.
>
> ```text
> Discovery makes these claims visible. It does not erase them.
> ```
>
> **After:** the door and the dormant claims carry the relation directly.
>
> ```text
> Opening the door brings dormant claims back into use.
> ```
>
> The same habit can expand into a whole managed-ambiguity sequence. In this
> case every interpretation receives a countervoice, the appeal becomes a
> neutral container, inspection receives one exact jurisdiction, and the final
> sentence explains how wonder and engineering must relate.
>
> ```text
> Rhythmic knocks sounded at the shrine of a dead valve keeper. Hearth witnesses
> received them as warning and support. Their opponents blamed pipe stress or a
> manufactured omen. The appeal kept both the report and the dispute.
>
> Material inspection upheld the steward's warning. The knocks had brought
> attention to the shrine and the copied record; they had not answered the
> technical question.
> ```
>
> **After:** the knock changes what Hearth witnesses do; the inspection then
> stands as a separate event. The prose leaves their relation open without
> installing a skeptic or explaining the approved uncertainty.
>
> ```text
> Rhythmic knocks sounded at the shrine of a dead valve keeper. Hearth witnesses
> received them as warning and support, and carried the copied page into the
> appeal under their sound.
>
> When inspectors opened the heatwork, its condition upheld the steward's
> warning.
> ```
>
> ### Viewpoint chorus
>
> **Before:** each office receives one evenly weighted ability and one approved
> limit. The information is sound, but the paragraph reads like an authority
> map translated into sentences.
>
> ```text
> The covenant witnesses could still testify about entry and exit terms. They
> could not assign the body, count the reserve, or turn a manifestation into the
> dead anchor's final command. The stewards could keep a household alive without
> deciding whether its inherited service was lawful. The mortuary witnesses
> could preserve an accusation from the dead without giving it custody of the
> stores.
> ```
>
> **After:** witnesses act upon books, grain, body, and inventory. The same
> authority boundary emerges from custody and consequence.
>
> ```text
> Covenant witnesses continued hearing entry and exit terms. Stewards kept the
> household minimum moving from the miracle ledger. The mortuary witnesses stayed
> with the body and death inventory. An accusation copied from the dead anchor
> therefore carried no order to open the stores.
> ```
>
> ### Symmetrical wonder-then-cost ledger
>
> **Before:** the prose inventories every support category, states the wonder,
> and immediately invoices failed seasons and exhaustion. Elsewhere the vault
> used the same sequence for unrelated institutions.
>
> ```text
> Field and shield records place a Papsenai claim beside the seed, water, hands,
> stores, watches, and recovery that carried it. Practitioners describe a bond to
> a reachable future. The people provisioning the work ask where the failed
> season or exhaustion went.
> ```
>
> **After:** material limits become a decision made before the working. The
> reserve remains visible without a completeness list or narrator's ethical
> receipt.
>
> ```text
> Before a Papsenai field bond begins, the household names the seed and
> subsistence it will withhold from the work. The shaman holds the remaining
> labor and reserve toward a reachable harvest. Later field records keep the
> decisions to continue, release, or abandon that future.
> ```
>
> ### List-clause congestion
>
> **Before:** the route blurb tries to certify a complete appeal by naming four
> evidence and conflict categories, then appends the moral remainder.
>
> ```text
> The Closed Lift Appeal follows rival forecasts, a detained lift captain,
> concealed sponsor plans, and a fatigued brake through a civic appeal whose
> correction left material claims behind.
> ```
>
> **After:** one concrete question and one consequential act give the reader
> enough information to choose the route.
>
> ```text
> Why did two sponsored forecasts omit what their sponsors planned to do with
> them? The Closed Lift Appeal makes the houses answer before the grain moves.
> ```
>
> ### Repeated sentence frames
>
> **Before:** four consecutive lives are exhibited through identical `A ...
> may` sentences.
>
> ```text
> A household may owe grain to a shrine because its god diverted a flood. A
> clerk may compare three prophetic reports before scheduling a lift. A healer
> may refuse divine aid near a hungry burial ground. A worker may know from the
> sound of a pipe that the priest's inherited formula is being used in the wrong
> season.
> ```
>
> **After:** the same breadth moves through grain, place, crew, refusal, sound,
> and family life with unequal sentence weights.
>
> ```text
> Most people meet the impossible while trying to make tomorrow resemble today.
> Grain pledged after a divine flood must still be planted and hauled. In a
> Sunwall ward, a clerk compares three prophetic reports before a lift crew moves
> the harvest. Elsewhere a healer turns divine aid away from a hungry burial
> ground, or a pipe worker hears an inherited formula used in the wrong season.
> Families form, bargain, worship, quarrel, and raise children through all of it.
> ```
>
> ### Checksum conclusions
>
> An early Windtrap repair compressed a longer consequence list into a polished
> setup and reversal:
>
> ```text
> Their corrected record followed them. Their contracts did not.
> ```
>
> Brevity did not solve the problem. The paired fragments made the author's
> control more audible. The accepted revision carries standing, livelihood,
> movement, and provenance in one uneven sequence:
>
> ```text
> The adopted keeper received a corrected record and no liability before changing
> family affiliation; the old contracts were never restored. Later copies have
> lost every name, the place, and the date.
> ```
>
> ### Workshop-dialect leakage
>
> **Before:** `legible` and `frame` summarize several cultures through the
> workshop's language of model boundaries.
>
> ```text
> Each practice makes some evidence legible and leaves other evidence outside
> its frame.
> ```
>
> **After:** a school-owned term leads to a specific inspection path and an
> exact evidentiary requirement.
>
> ```text
> Ju'onai schools call certain local causal scars aftermarks. An aftermark can
> send an inspector back to a shifted brace, a cracked seal, or a sequence of
> movements. Naming an actor or intention requires other evidence even in the
> strictest school accounts.
> ```
>
> The repaired passage still contains analytic language. It earns that language
> through Ju'onai ownership and an act an inspector can perform.
>
> ### Generic smoothing
>
> **Before:** the route blurb reduces a peculiar shared structure to broad
> themes—water, accusation, and repair—and ends in atmospheric fog.
>
> ```text
> After the High Windtrap Broke follows water, accusation, and repair across
> three Selza'a family territories after a shared work fails in the fog.
> ```
>
> **After:** dependency and the corroded anchor give the source a material edge
> without pretending to summarize its significance.
>
> ```text
> Three Selza'a families depend on the same high windtrap. After the High
> Windtrap Broke begins when its corroded anchor gives way.
> ```
>
> ### False positives and edits to resist
>
> - `The table is not a table.` is deliberate antithesis spoken through the
> ritual and physical arrangement of a particular scene. It is not narrator
> correction theatre.
> - `Death does not guarantee silence.` states a setting condition before names,
> gestures, smoke, and burial grounds demonstrate it. It is not a moral
> qualification attached to praise.
> - The living-claims list in `Relics and Ruins` and the terms of a delving
> compact are functional play inventories. Their elements answer different
> questions at the table; compressing them would remove usable information.
> - A term such as `record`, `claim`, or `bounded` remains welcome when a named
> court, school, compact, or keeper owns it. Diffusion across unrelated
> narrators is the defect.
>
> For every finding, quote or precisely locate the smallest relevant passage,
> show whether it recurs elsewhere, explain the reading effect, and state what
> work the passage still needs to perform. Recommend a repair direction such as