grounds text the floor accepts can be refused by the site renderer and the entry is append only so no verb can remove it

grounds text the floor accepts can be refused by the site renderer and the entry is append only so no verb can remove it

Found by the round-5 security review, which recommended it be filed because no record covered it.

Grounds text that clears the substance floor and the readability guard can still be refused by the site renderer. The reviewer verified five constructs accepted by grounds.New plus RecordGrounds and refused by abcd site build: an unclosed code span, a remote image, a raw <div>, an undefined reference link and a footnote link. The natural one is the first, and it needs no malice at all:

pursued: we expect the `--grounds flag to make the conjecture survive the session

One unbalanced backtick in a sentence naming a flag. site-render is one of the six make preflight gates, a CI step and a release gate, so the record lands and the build goes red.

The class is PRE-EXISTING: the same unbalanced backtick in an ordinary issue body does the same thing today. Two things make the grounds path worse rather than equal. Recording grounds is now MANDATORY, because groundsCheck refuses a planned record without an entry. And the ledger is APPEND-ONLY by design, with no verb that removes an entry, so where a body can be re-edited by a command this residue can only be removed by hand-editing the committed record.

The readability guard's own doc is silent about this: it says a bullet that fails to raise the count is refused, which is true of ParseGrounds and says nothing about the second reader that runs in the same preflight.

Grounds

• pursued: no grounds entry a verb can write makes site build refuse the record it lands in; a grounds text that New accepts and site-render then refuses would show it wrong