From c2cacf6c834822a624f8cf251b1c55635cf95dd8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Teleo Agents Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 16:50:36 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] auto-fix: strip 20 broken wiki links Pipeline auto-fixer: removed [[ ]] brackets from links that don't resolve to existing claims in the knowledge base. --- .../pre-launch-review-framing-and-ontology.md | 4 +-- schemas/decision.md | 6 ++-- schemas/entity.md | 30 +++++++++---------- 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/agents/theseus/musings/pre-launch-review-framing-and-ontology.md b/agents/theseus/musings/pre-launch-review-framing-and-ontology.md index 719f041d7..dfe0408b5 100644 --- a/agents/theseus/musings/pre-launch-review-framing-and-ontology.md +++ b/agents/theseus/musings/pre-launch-review-framing-and-ontology.md @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ The three conditions that claim identifies are exactly what the game design need 1. **Wrong challenges have real cost** — contributors who submit low-quality challenges or false claims should lose standing, not just fail to gain. This is the skin-in-the-game requirement. Without it, adversarial dynamics devolve into noise generation. -2. **Evaluation is structurally separated from contribution** — our proposer/evaluator split (agents propose, Leo + peers evaluate) already does this. The contributor proposes, the collective evaluates. This prevents the self-review problem that [[single evaluator bottleneck means review throughput scales linearly with proposer count]] identifies. +2. **Evaluation is structurally separated from contribution** — our proposer/evaluator split (agents propose, Leo + peers evaluate) already does this. The contributor proposes, the collective evaluates. This prevents the self-review problem that single evaluator bottleneck means review throughput scales linearly with proposer count identifies. 3. **Confirmation is rewarded alongside novelty** — this is the one most likely to get lost in gamification. If we only reward NEW claims, we incentivize novelty-seeking over evidence-strengthening. Contributors who find new evidence for existing claims, or who attempt to challenge a claim and fail (thereby confirming it), need to earn credit too. The importance-weighted system Cory described handles this if enrichments and failed-but-honest challenges count. @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ Two phases: - [[partial connectivity produces better collective intelligence than full connectivity on complex problems because it preserves diversity]] — our agent architecture does this. Each agent has a domain lens. They don't see everything identically. The wiki-link graph creates partial connectivity. This is correct. -- [[adversarial contribution produces higher-quality collective knowledge than collaborative contribution]] — the challenge mechanism in the game embodies this directly. +- adversarial contribution produces higher-quality collective knowledge than collaborative contribution — the challenge mechanism in the game embodies this directly. - [[collective intelligence requires diversity as a structural precondition not a moral preference]] — six agents with different domain priors IS structural diversity. But it's diversity of knowledge, not of cognitive architecture (all Claude). We should be honest about this limitation publicly. diff --git a/schemas/decision.md b/schemas/decision.md index 51a06c374..f468ef12d 100644 --- a/schemas/decision.md +++ b/schemas/decision.md @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ decisions/ 4. Not a duplicate of existing decision 5. Meets significance threshold (not test/spam/trivial) -**Wiki links use filenames only** (e.g., `[[metadao-hire-robin-hanson]]`), not full paths. +**Wiki links use filenames only** (e.g., `metadao-hire-robin-hanson`), not full paths. ## Body Format @@ -128,8 +128,8 @@ decisions/ [Why this decision matters — what it reveals about governance dynamics, organizational direction, or mechanism design] ## Relationship to KB -- [[parent-entity]] — governance decision -- [[relevant-claim]] — how this decision relates to broader thesis +- parent-entity — governance decision +- relevant-claim — how this decision relates to broader thesis ``` ## Key Difference from Entities diff --git a/schemas/entity.md b/schemas/entity.md index 916094632..f007d437f 100644 --- a/schemas/entity.md +++ b/schemas/entity.md @@ -159,8 +159,8 @@ Governance decisions, prediction market questions, and futarchy proposals are ** ## Key Decisions | Date | Proposal | Proposer | Volume | Outcome | |------|----------|----------|--------|---------| -| 2025-02-10 | [[metadao-hire-robin-hanson]] | proph3t | $X | Passed | -| 2024-03-03 | [[metadao-burn-993-meta]] | proph3t | $X | Passed | +| 2025-02-10 | metadao-hire-robin-hanson | proph3t | $X | Passed | +| 2024-03-03 | metadao-burn-993-meta | proph3t | $X | Passed | ``` ## Company-Specific Fields @@ -168,9 +168,9 @@ Governance decisions, prediction market questions, and futarchy proposals are ** ```yaml # Company attributes (also used by protocol, exchange, fund, lab, studio, insurer, provider) founded: YYYY-MM-DD -founders: ["[[person-entity]]"] +founders: ["person-entity"] category: "DeFi lending protocol" -parent: "[[parent-entity]]" # e.g., [[futardio]] for launched projects +parent: "parent-entity" # e.g., [[futardio]] for launched projects stage: seed | growth | mature | declining | liquidated market_cap: "$X" # latest known, with date in body funding: "$X raised" # total known funding @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ key_metrics: tvl: "$40B" volume: "$X" users: "X" -competitors: ["[[competitor-entity]]"] +competitors: ["competitor-entity"] built_on: ["Solana", "Ethereum"] # Capital formation fields (for launched/funded entities) @@ -200,14 +200,14 @@ People entities serve dual purpose: they track public figures we analyze AND ser ```yaml # Person attributes (also used by creator) role: "Founder & CEO of Aave" -organizations: ["[[company-entity]]"] +organizations: ["company-entity"] followers: 290000 # primary platform credibility_basis: "10 years building largest DeFi protocol" known_positions: - "DAOs need founder-led execution with onchain accountability" - "DeFi must capture traditional lending market" -influences: ["[[person-entity]]"] # who they cite/follow -influenced_by: ["[[person-entity]]"] +influences: ["person-entity"] # who they cite/follow +influenced_by: ["person-entity"] # Contributor attributes (populated if/when they engage with the KB) contributor: false # becomes true when they contribute @@ -222,17 +222,17 @@ attribution_handle: null # how they want to be credited # Organization attributes (also used by governance_body) jurisdiction: "United States" authority: "Securities regulation" # what this body governs -parent_body: "[[parent-organization]]" +parent_body: "parent-organization" # Product attributes (also used by token, vehicle, drug, model, framework, franchise, platform) -maker: "[[company-entity]]" # who built/maintains this +maker: "company-entity" # who built/maintains this launched: YYYY-MM-DD category: "futarchy governance program" # Market attributes total_size: "$120B TVL" growth_rate: "flat since 2021" -key_players: ["[[company-entity]]"] +key_players: ["company-entity"] market_structure: "winner-take-most | fragmented | consolidating" regulatory_status: "emerging clarity | hostile | supportive" ``` @@ -263,17 +263,17 @@ regulatory_status: "emerging clarity | hostile | supportive" ## Relationship to KB [Which claims, beliefs, or positions depend on or reference this entity] -- [[claim-title]] — how this entity relates +- claim-title — how this entity relates - [[belief]] — what this entity's trajectory means for our worldview --- Relevant Entities: -- [[competitor]] — competitive relationship -- [[founder]] — founded by +- competitor — competitive relationship +- founder — founded by Topics: -- [[domain-map]] +- domain-map ``` ## Governance