David/dotfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

chore(memory): Basic Memory trial begins — sync normalization baseline (283 files)

Browse Source 
Basic Memory v0.21.6 first sync over the live memory dir (steward-authorized
live-dir trial, Option A 2026-06-06): adds permalink: to frontmatter, refolds
long YAML description lines, strips final newlines. Bodies untouched —
verified via full diff classification. From this commit forward, any diff in
claude/memory shows only what Basic Memory or the session writes.

Trial design: MemPalace untouched as incumbent; git status check on this dir
at every wrap; end-of-day evaluation (recall quality, sync robustness,
rebuild-from-files, malformed-file behavior).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
David F Glidden
2026-06-06 09:52:17 +02:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 4.8
parent 161fad7ae2
commit 3f9a89b00c
283 changed files with 2055 additions and 620 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
claude/memory/feedback-load-bearing-not-by-immediate-weight.md
+6 -3
View File
@@ -1,10 +1,13 @@
---
name: feedback-load-bearing-not-by-immediate-weight
description: "Load-bearing is not measured by immediate visible weight. Small discipline marks that don't seem to carry weight in the moment carry it every time they activate; the cumulative cost they prevent is invisible until they prevent it."
metadata:
description: Load-bearing is not measured by immediate visible weight. Small discipline
marks that don't seem to carry weight in the moment carry it every time they activate;
the cumulative cost they prevent is invisible until they prevent it.
metadata:
node_type: memory
type: feedback
originSessionId: 13bd65a2-634d-4ec4-a92c-d3d6fe0ee4db
permalink: claude-memory/feedback-load-bearing-not-by-immediate-weight
---
**Rule:** When evaluating whether a small discipline addition (a flag, a named posture, a structural mark) is "worth adding," do not measure by its weight in the moment of addition. Measure by what it carries every time it activates over the practice's lifespan — including all the moments the steward would otherwise have to intervene to re-supply the discipline.
@@ -15,4 +18,4 @@ metadata:
1. Ask what failure mode it catches when it activates — not what it costs to add.
2. Ask whether the failure mode is currently held by *steward intervention* — if yes, this is the audit's *move-from-procedure-into-structure* shape and the addition is load-bearing by definition.
3. Refuse the hedging form *"modest benefit / would also be defensible to skip"* when (1) and (2) point the same direction. Take the position cleanly; the steward shouldn't have to overcome executor self-effacement to authorize work the executor already verified.
4. Connects to: [[drift-pattern-honest-restraint-vs-contamination-shaped-self-effacement]], the Prime Directive's *"build what you will not need to rebuild,"* and the audit's cross-skill finding *"load-bearing items currently named in procedure but not enforced in structure."*
4. Connects to: [[drift-pattern-honest-restraint-vs-contamination-shaped-self-effacement]], the Prime Directive's *"build what you will not need to rebuild,"* and the audit's cross-skill finding *"load-bearing items currently named in procedure but not enforced in structure."*