Verified A's venue cluster-adjacency bias (110c828), assigned from my R20 relocation
finding. selfcheck ALL GREEN 154141/154141 against A's re-pinned goldens.
ACCEPTANCE PASSES ON ALL FIVE (no venue with <3 shops in its 160m radius):
katoomba min 9 | newtown min 5 | bendigo min 5 | castlemaine min 4 | fremantle min 3.
Castlemaine's floor did NOT need an exemption.
MY HEADLINE FINDING IS CLOSED: katoomba's pub — "a gig with no passing crowd", 1 shop
at 1007m — now sits at 466m with 9 shops. Newtown is the dramatic fix: all three venues
were 2.2-2.4km out with 0-1 shops; its rsl now sits 29m from the hub with 11.
THE CROWD FOLLOWED (katoomba pub, same density/seed/21:00): passing crowd 34->66 (2x),
patron checks 226->442 (2x), inside frames 1042->1424, roster 2->3, 0 NaN.
TWO READINGS THAT NEED CARE:
- fremantle is the weakest pass: pub/rsl clear the >=3 bar but moved FURTHER from the
primary hub (969->1352m, 561->1292m) — A's bias optimises local cluster adjacency and
they found a secondary cluster. Letter satisfied, crowd healthy (pub roster 6, inside
2741), so not a miss — just named. A's call if they want it tighter.
- venue-win % DROPPING is not a regression (newtown rsl 100%->21%). It was only 100%
because the venue was alone; post-bias it has neighbours competing for finds while
total crowd rose. Isolation flatters that metric — ignore it post-bias.
D->F: relocation verify GREEN, no gate concern for v4.0-beta.
FYI F: selfcheck scans every towns/*.json on disk incl. E's UNTRACKED pack WIP — I saw
it transiently RED (newcastle_real, no open-late shop) then green minutes later. If you
gate while E is mid-fetch you may catch a false red; check if a failure is a pack town.
Still filed for v4.x: GIG_RANGE 34m radius vs single-chunk lookup (8.7% chunk-blind).
Flagged as unowned: R20's main-street relocation half (hero strip vs densest cluster).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
01c925816e