Retelling his boyhood: while others heard only a disturbance when the ship blasted for its captain, he lay dreaming himself aboard, knowing his father and the captain were on the veranda below getting drunk, and he still loves the peculiar odor of a ship.
Date (happened)
between 1905 and 1923
unresolved
between 1905 and 1923
stated · probable · preferred
before 1969
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [540403] belong to telling lecture nids [1466]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1969 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1969 is the MIN across telling lectures.
Told / reported
18 November 1968
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 1466 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 1466 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1968-11-18 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1969-6-23 refuted; 1968-11-18 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1969-06-23 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1969-06-23 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`).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.
23 June 1969
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1466, 1969-6-23) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1968-11-18. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
23 June 1969
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 1466 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1466 delivery claims: 1969-6-23 doubtful; 1968-11-18 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 1466, 1969-6-23) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1968-11-18. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Test Yourselves ¶52 (To this very moment I could smell any ship in the world. Do you know a ship has an odor unlike anything in the world?)
- Test Yourselves ¶9 (My father provided ships with food and liquor and all the things that they needed, and so he entertained the captain, the chief steward, and all that he served.)