Neville says he admires Lincoln and owns biographies of him by many different writers.
Date (happened)
before 1957
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [528187] belong to telling lecture nids [1030]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1957 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1957 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 1971
bound · possible
Why
Corrects the phase4 L6a envelope on this event from before 1957 to before 1971.
Reasoning
Envelope recompute, arithmetic only. The phase4 L6a row on this event states its own rule: each telling lecture contributes MAX of its non-refuted delivery years, and the envelope is the MIN across telling lectures. Recomputed live over lecture nid(s) 1030 that row cites, MAX(non-refuted field_delivery_year) gives 1971, not the 1957 the row carries — the bound was below its own stated rule and therefore UNSAFE: it asserted the event did not happen in 14 year(s) where it may sit. Same premise, same evidence, no re-reading and no re-judgement; only the maximum was taken correctly. The L6a row stands beside this one (append-only). Ruling: #2235 delta 1, architect 378.
before 30 July 1971
bound · possible
Why
M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 047)
Reasoning
Matches the SF summer 1971 series close (frame season 20575).
Told / reported
after 20 July 1971
estimated · probable
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1030 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1030 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1971-7-20 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1957-??-?? refuted; 1971-7-20 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1957-00-00 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1957-00-00 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
1957
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1030, 1957--) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-7-20. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
1957
stated · refuted
Why
Corrects the confidence of the told claim written by run `corpus v1 / phase3b` at delta 0 on this event; that claim is left standing per append-only. Ceiling rule #2132.
Reasoning
Confidence only; the date is not re-adjudicated and is left exactly as written. This claim is derived from the delivery claims of node 1030 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1030 delivery claims: 1957-??-?? doubtful; 1971-7-20 probable. Walked back to `probable`, the ceiling. Whether the DATE is right is a separate question this row does not touch; if the evidence turns out to support more confidence, it will have to come from a source other than this node. || v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1030, 1957--) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-7-20. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- The Promise Fulfilled ¶19 (I admire the great Lincoln. I have his biography by many who wrote it . . wrote the story of Lincoln.)