Repository source: docs/plans/fastmod_prepublication_hold/fastmod_prepublication_hold_debug_log.md
Fastmod Prepublication Hold — Railspike Debug Log
2026-10-15T00:28:44Z — Step 1
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Repository Boundary and Planning Artifacts: distinguished the workflow instructions from the requested host-project deliverable. Retain; the request names the instruction file rather than an artifact destination.docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step1_solution_assessment.md, Structure: comparing alternatives exposed the difference between asynchronous postpublication scoring and private prepublication intake. Retain the options and vertical-slice recommendation requirements.docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Railspike Debug Mode / Project default: the host-root marker establishes enabled state for this new workflow. Retain the snapshot rule.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, How to Use This Chain and Key Rules, and Step 1 instruction file, Next: the same approval boundary appears repeatedly during one step. Consolidate the rule into one contract with references; retain the boundary itself.
Uncertain assessments
Step 1's one-page limit has no rendering specification; preserving the original query plus comparing alternatives makes page length ambiguous. Clarify a target word count or whether quoted original requests are excluded. The assessment stays concise without dropping the supplied todo items.
2026-10-15T01:35:58Z — Step 1 Revision
Revises the assessment direction from the initial Step 1 entry following explicit user clarification; previous diagnostics remain historical.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step1_solution_assessment.md, Review and revision: preserving the Original Query while recording Revised Direction allowed the approved-user exemption and history-driven policy to replace the initial universal-gate recommendation. Retain this rule and the requirement to recheck tradeoffs.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No supported findings beyond the previously recorded repeated approval-boundary finding.
Uncertain assessments
The user's “scored first” leaves initial publication timing and later automatic release open. The revised assessment labels its interpretation and preserves both viable enforcement approaches for review rather than treating that interpretation as settled scope.
2026-10-15T01:45:53Z — Step 1 Revision
Supersedes the previous assessment's interpretation that retrospective removal was separate scope. The user confirmed initial public scoring, required holds on earlier submissions upon triggering, and authorized any approved user to approve a held post.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step1_solution_assessment.md, Review and revision: rechecking compatibility exposed the need for retroactive visibility updates and for distinguishing individual post approval from author approval. Retain this requirement.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No new supported findings.
Uncertain assessments
Earlier-submission age/import boundaries and rejection authority remain unspecified. Record them as future policy decisions without weakening the confirmed retroactive-hold and approved-reviewer requirements.
2026-10-15T01:53:26Z — Step 1 Revision
Supersedes the earlier public-scoring-period assumption: the user now requires new posts from unapproved users to be initially held.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step1_solution_assessment.md, Review and revision: rechecking compatibility distinguished unconditional initial holds from later score-based release and preserved the approved-author exemption and approved-reviewer permission. Retain the requirement to revise options rather than merely append conflicting policy.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No new supported findings.
Uncertain assessments
Initial holds do not establish whether automatic release is allowed. The assessment compares human release with conditional automatic release and leaves this question explicit; the remaining role of history and precedence of earlier human approvals also need resolution.
2026-10-15T01:54:16Z — Step 1 Revision
Updates the recommendation to conditional automatic release following user authorization. Earlier manual-only recommendations remain historical.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step1_solution_assessment.md, Review and revision: updating the recommendation and removing the resolved authorization question kept the assessment consistent with the user’s selected behavior. Retain.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No new supported findings.
Uncertain assessments
“No time bound” could describe retroactive age coverage or hold duration. Both interpretations are labeled in the artifact: no age cutoff and no timeout-based release. Precise score-history aggregation remains a later policy decision.
2026-10-15T01:55:50Z — Step 2
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step2_feature_description.md, Shared component inventory: checking source history, image serving, existing write/scoring entry points and offline publication exposed disclosure surfaces beyond post cards. Retain the inventory requirement.Same file, Risks: recording impact, early validation and mitigation makes calibration, visibility and approval-precedence decisions explicit blockers before Step 3. Retain.
docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Commit discipline: kept approved Step 1 and the new Step 2 draft uncommitted, preserving the planning gate. Retain.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No new supported findings.
Uncertain assessments
Same file, Deliverable and Shared component inventory: the one-page target conflicts with enumerating the broad public surfaces and necessary recovery for this feature. The draft prioritizes explicit requirements and risks; clarify the length limit for visibility-sensitive changes rather than dropping relevant boundaries.
Human-approval precedence and imported-content coverage remain unresolved; the document labels proposals and requires resolution before Step 3 instead of silently treating them as approved.
2026-10-15T05:29:03Z — Step 2 Revision
Supersedes the binary held/public framing in the initial Step 2 draft with the user-requested neutral approved-only, negative operator-only and positive public audiences. Step 1 remains the approved historical assessment; this revised Step 2 requires approval before further planning.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step2_feature_description.md, Shared component inventory and Risks: graded visibility requires viewer-aware normal reading surfaces and distribution controls, rather than only a review queue. Retain these requirements.docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Plan review: keeping the revised policy in the current artifact preserves the approved assessment while making the new scope reviewable. Retain the current-step revision boundary.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No new supported findings.
Uncertain assessments
The user specifies negative standing as operator-only but earlier allowed approval by any approved user. The draft proposes approval only by authorized viewers, flags operator-only approval for confirmation, and preserves human-override precedence as unresolved.
Positive/negative standing is not the existing 0–1 hold probability. Thresholds and aggregation need calibration rather than a guessed sign conversion.
2026-10-15T05:33:42Z — Step 2 Revision
Resolves the operator-approval uncertainty from the 2026-10-15T05:29:03Z entry: the user explicitly confirmed that approval of negative-standing users' posts is limited to operators. Updated the core requirement, authority risk and remaining-decision list consistently.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Plan review: recording the explicit clarification in the current requirements keeps review permissions consistent with visibility. Retain the requirement to maintain the artifact as decisions change.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No supported findings.
2026-10-15T05:39:21Z — Step 3 Draft Readiness
The three-slice split is now explicitly approved. Created a provisional eight-stage slice-1 plan; this is not a completed Step 3 handoff or an implementation-ready sizing claim.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step3_development_plan_do.md, stage sizing and material-risk guardrails: discovery/read-view integration and distribution protections remain potentially oversized. The first stage requires validation and blocks application work if the estimate fails. Retain the size and dependency checks; a numbered plan alone is not evidence of feasibility.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No supported findings.
Uncertain assessments
The full unsplit work is estimated at 18–24 hour-sized stages; no complete unsplit breakdown has been produced. The eight-stage slice-1 draft is provisional and has not passed the After checklist's atomic-sizing criterion.
Author self-view, imports and human-approval precedence are recorded as proposed defaults requiring resolution. Host distribution evidence is also needed before activation.
2026-10-15T05:41:38Z — Step 2/3 Revision
Supersedes earlier rollback requirements that disabled enforcement preserve restricted visibility. The user explicitly agreed that flag off restores current visibility for all content, including previously held posts; retained scores/decisions allow flag on to restore restrictions. Existing instance-wide restrictions remain applicable.
Necessary/useful instructions
docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Plan review: revising the Step 2 contract and dependent Step 3 recovery, artifact and verification requirements removed conflicting rollback behavior. Retain cross-artifact consistency checks when requirements change.
Redundant/unnecessary instructions
No supported findings.
Uncertain assessments
Re-enabling restrictions cannot revoke copies obtained while off or erase public Git history. The plan calls for reversible public projections and explicit flag-transition validation; distribution feasibility and stage sizing remain unresolved before implementation.