Neville says that when Vicki goes away, she and her housemate bring the birds and the dog to his home, where he must change the birds' paper, water and feed them and keep Stanley - even though his own housing contract says no dogs.
Date (happened)
after 20 July 1971
unresolved
after 20 July 1971
bound · probable · preferred
Why
Supersedes d0 (bound/before/1957/possible), built entirely on the now-questioned 1957 legacy delivery claim.
Reasoning
The passage is a present-tense description of an ongoing, habitual arrangement (minding Vicki's birds and dog whenever she travels), so the happening date equals the telling date. The lecture's internal content (a 1959 event dated 'twelve years ago the last 20th of July', plus a contemporaneous reference to 1971) fixes the delivery, and therefore this telling, to after 1971-07-20 -- correcting the legacy 1957 claim the corpus itself already flags as contradicted.
before 1957
bound · refuted
Why
pm-actor-525: refuted by the M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 031): Built on the refuted 1957 delivery; the lecture is after 1971-07-20.
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [528209] 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 · refuted
Why
pm-actor-525: refuted by the M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 031): The lecture is after 20 July 1971 and the arrangement is present tense, so 'before 1971' contradicts the after-1971-07-20 claim.
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.
Told / reported
after 20 July 1971
bound · probable
Why
No exact delivery day is recoverable from the evidence, only the lower bound.
Reasoning
The lecture's legacy 1957 delivery claim is marked questioned_by_internal_evidence in its own record: the text places a 1959 San Francisco event 'twelve years ago the last 20th of July' and speaks of 1971 contemporaneously, giving a derived bound of after 1971-07-20 at probable (the lecture's own ceiling). Replaces the stale certain-1957 told claim, which rested on the contradicted legacy row.
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 2: 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 ¶41 (I have to take the little birds and change the paper and water them and give them feed, and then, of course, I have Stanley with me. And I live in a home where my contract says, No dogs.)