Verification Report: The Joke We All Share

Final Gate Audit — Prologue + Chapters 1–7

Date: March 15, 2026 Auditor: Verification Pass (automated, post-editorial) Source of success criteria: INTENT.md (located at /Users/primus/git/teaparty/projects/humor-book/INTENT.md)

PRELIMINARY NOTE ON INTENT.md

INTENT.md does not exist at the worktree root. It is located at the main project root (/Users/primus/git/teaparty/projects/humor-book/INTENT.md). The criteria audited below are drawn from that file. The editorial report (editorial/editorial_report.md) was also read in full; where it makes relevant prior findings, they are noted.

SECTION 1: SUCCESS CRITERIA AUDIT

INTENT.md lists five explicit success criteria. Each is evaluated in turn.

CRITERION 1: A general reader finishes the book feeling that they laughed, learned something surprising, and believe the thesis more than when they started.

Verdict: PASS

This is the hardest criterion to audit mechanically, but the evidence is substantial. The manuscript opens with an actual working joke (the riddle), then deploys the Sumerian fart joke, and the humor is not merely quoted — it is performed in the prose. Representative moments across the manuscript that would produce laughter in a general reader include:

The Yanomami "best joke of 1964" (Ch1, Chagnon's five months of obscene genealogical data)
"A miser wrote his will and named himself as sole heir." (Ch2, Philogelos)
The Chaplin/sumo alibi (Ch3): "The body that kept falling down was considered worth a bullet."
The Friars Club/Gottfried pivot (Ch4/Ch5)
The Ravenna squirrel photograph (Ch6)
The spam-as-internet-noise payoff (Ch7): "The joke never resolved. The Vikings are still chanting."

Thesis development is cumulative and argued with genuine counterevidence at every stage. By Ch7, the reader has been walked through biology (Ch1), temporal reach (Ch2), physical/social comedy (Ch3), belonging (Ch4), extremity (Ch5), visual floor (Ch6), and the final synthesis lands as earned rather than asserted.

CRITERION 2: Each chapter demonstrates universality with at least one example from a non-Western culture, one historical example (pre-20th century), and one example that crosses or challenges the chapter's own premise.

Verdict: PASS (with one partial flag)

Chapter-by-chapter:

Chapter	Non-Western example	Pre-20th century example	Counter/challenge example
Prologue	Yoruba alo apamo; rakugo (Japan)	Sumerian fart joke (1900 BCE)	Keaton, Zen koans, Breton anti-jokes
Ch1	Yanomami (Chagnon, 1964); Eibl-Eibesfeldt fieldwork	Darwin peekaboo (1839); Davila Ross (2009)	Barrett constructed emotion theory / Himba data
Ch2	Chunyu Kun (China, 300 BCE); Egyptian tomb workers (1150 BCE)	Philogelos (~4th–5th c. CE); Sumer (1900 BCE)	Abderite jokes — the filter proven by failure
Ch3	Busu (Japan); wǔ chǒu (China); Vidushaka/Nāṭyaśāstra (India)	Asteas phlyax vase (350 BCE); Mughal-era court	South Korean compliance laughter (Kim & Plester)
Ch4	Sanankuya (Mali/West Africa, 1236+); Ba'al Shem Tov	Desert Fathers (Apophthegmata Patrum)	Danson/Goldberg: mechanism meets its structural limit
Ch5	Posada's Calavera Garbancera (Mexico); Wikan (Bali/Egypt)	Danse macabre (1424); Boccaccio (1348)	Mencia, Gervais — failure cases confirm permission limit
Ch6	Chaplin in Shanghai (1922); Deir el-Medina papyrus (1150 BCE)	Smithfield Decretals (1340s); Rutland Psalter (1260)	Pampers stork (inert outside folkloric context); Doge language-split
Ch7	Sukumar Ray/Abol Tabol (Bengal, 1923); Nasreddin Hodja	Land of Cockaigne (1305); Nasreddin Hodja	Manzai (closes gap, opposite of Western absurdism); Fliegender Zirkus failure

Partial flag — Ch2 word count and Ch7 Ray example: The Ch2 draft runs approximately 6,793 words (see Section 4), which is below the 7,000-word floor. More substantively, the editorial report flags the Sukumar Ray treatment in Ch7 as thin — "Ray gets three paragraphs, one of which is about his son Satyajit's attempts to translate him" — with no quoted example from Abol Tabol. By contrast, Kharms gets his full "Blue Notebook No. 10" reproduced. The non-Western parallel the chapter needs (two independent absurdist traditions, same decade, opposite ends of Eurasia) is asserted but not demonstrated at equivalent weight for Ray. This is a real gap.

CRITERION 3: The five boundaries (cultural, temporal, linguistic, belief, technological) are each addressed substantively somewhere in the book — not merely name-checked.

Verdict: PASS

Cultural: Core argument of Ch3 (Chaplin reception across Japan, India, USSR); Ch4 (sanankuya); Ch5 (Wikan's Balinese/Egyptian contrast). The book's entire structure addresses cultural boundaries.
Temporal: Core argument of Ch2. Jokes from 1900 BCE to 2024. The Philogelos doctor joke tracked through 1,600 years of transmission.
Linguistic: Ch6 (visual comedy bypasses language entirely; Chaplin in Shanghai; roll dance in Berlin); Ch7 (Nyan Cat as pure formal loop requiring no words). Also argued throughout Ch2 (the filter: what survives translation and what doesn't).
Belief: Ch4 (Desert Fathers, Ba'al Shem Tov); Ch5 (Irish wake prohibited by two separate religious establishments; Boccaccio and the plague; danse macabre). The belief-based boundary is addressed but is more diffused across chapters than the others rather than having a single chapter that "owns" it.
Technological: Ch7 explicitly (the Spam sketch becoming the internet's word for unwanted repetitive noise; Nyan Cat; Doge). The internet as a new context for humor distribution is addressed in Ch2 (the 2008 viral moment) and Ch7.

All five boundaries are addressed at substantive length, not merely name-checked. The belief boundary is the thinnest but still handled across two chapters with specific examples.

CRITERION 4: The thesis lands emotionally, not just intellectually, in the final chapter.

Verdict: PASS

The final pages of Ch7 accomplish this. The prose slows deliberately in "The Floor" and the closing sections. The Frankl quotation — "Humor, more than anything else in the human make-up, can afford an aloofness and an ability to rise above any situation, even if only for a few seconds" — is quoted accurately and then repeated ("Even if only for a few seconds") as a standalone line that changes register. The closing image ("There is a room somewhere right now...a café in England, or a living room in Japan, or a market square in Mali, or an ice tent in Antarctica") arrives as feeling rather than argument. Robin Dunbar's acoustic observation — "From the sound alone, you cannot tell what anyone is laughing at...which country you are in, or which century" — is the emotional landing point before the final Camus substitution. The editorial report concurs: "This is one of the manuscript's best moments."

The one concern the editorial report raises — "the transition into the callback section — 'I want to slow down here, because we are approaching something' — is the one moment in the chapter where the prose telegraphs its own architecture too explicitly" — is a real and fair observation (see Section 5 below), but it does not prevent the emotional landing from working. The final three sections arrive as feeling.

CRITERION 5: No chapter reads like a listicle or a Wikipedia summary. Every chapter has a throughline — a small argument of its own.

Verdict: PASS

Chapter throughlines:

Prologue: The two-beat structure is not a convention; it is a consequence of how predictive minds work.
Ch1: The hardware was installed before culture arrived; the laughter is the starting condition, not the result.
Ch2: The filter is a simple one — jokes running on universal fuel survive; jokes running on borrowed local assumptions die.
Ch3: The fall is not the joke; the distance fallen — measured in social space — is the joke.
Ch4: "You had to be there" is the mechanism's self-description. The content is always local; the apparatus is always the same.
Ch5: The mechanism travels. The permission doesn't. Both things are true and neither cancels the other out.
Ch6: Visual humor runs on older, more distributed neural hardware, less dependent on cultural convention; the jokes that don't require a caption have been funny for three thousand years.
Ch7: The capacity for absurdist humor is evidence of sophisticated logic-norm formation; the widest circle in the world is the one that expects things to make sense.

Each chapter argues its own case and contributes to the cumulative build. None reads as a list of funny examples.

SECTION 2: SPECIFIC CONFIRMATIONS

A. No chapter opens with a thesis statement (all 8 must pass)

Verdict: ALL 8 PASS

Chapter	Opening	Compliant?
Prologue	"I have cities but no houses. / I have mountains but no trees..." — the riddle, cold	PASS
Ch1	"The device was meant for bats." — Panksepp's bat detector, Ohio laboratory	PASS
Ch2	"Something about this is funny to you: Something which has never occurred since time immemorial..." — the Sumerian joke, addressed to the reader	PASS
Ch3	"It is Muromachi Japan — the fifteenth century, give or take..." — the Busu play, present-tense scene	PASS
Ch4	"On October 8, 1993, Ted Danson walked into the Friars Club Roast of Whoopi Goldberg in full blackface." — scene, cold	PASS
Ch5	"On February 12, 1916, British officers in the ruins of Ypres found a printing press in the rubble of a bombed building." — scene, cold	PASS
Ch6	"The squirrel has committed." — Marchetti's photograph, present-tense description	PASS
Ch7	"The menu is not encouraging." — the Spam sketch, present-tense café, no framing	PASS

Not one chapter opens with a thesis statement, a general claim, or a statement of the chapter's argument. All eight open with a scene, image, or joke. This is clean across the board.

B. The Prologue's opening joke lands before any analysis

Verdict: PASS

The riddle drops cold on the first line without even a title attribution. The answer ("A map.") arrives in the following paragraph, and the analysis — "That click is what this book is about" — comes after the answer, not before. The Sumerian fart joke is introduced at line 18 with "Here is the oldest written joke anyone has ever found," and the reader is invited to laugh before any theory is offered. The thesis paragraph — "Here is the argument" — appears on page 3 of the prologue, after both jokes have been deployed and have landed. The word "universal" does not appear in the first 300 words. Confirmed.

C. Ch7's final paragraphs arrive as feeling rather than argument

Verdict: PASS

The final three sections of Ch7 — "The Floor," the historian-absorbed section, and the unnamed closing section — slow significantly. The register shifts from analytical to contemplative beginning with: "Here is what you reach when you strip everything away." The Frankl quotation and its twice-repeated "even if only for a few seconds" create a lyric beat that is not making an argument but inhabiting one. The penultimate paragraph ("There is a room somewhere right now...") is entirely imagistic — no claim, no causal chain, just a scene that accumulates evidence of universality through enumeration of places and the acoustic description of laughter. The final line — "One must imagine Sisyphus laughing" — arrives without preamble and without explanation. This is feeling, not argument. Confirmed.

D. The Camus substitution ("laughing" not "happy") is owned in text

Verdict: FAIL

This is the report's single clean FAIL.

The original Camus line from The Myth of Sisyphus (1942) is: "One must imagine Sisyphus happy." The manuscript's final line reads: "One must imagine Sisyphus laughing."

The substitution is not acknowledged anywhere in the main text. There is no surrounding sentence that notes the revision, no clause that marks the "not happy, laughing" distinction, no signal that the reader who knows Camus will catch. The editorial report identified this precisely: "A reader familiar with Camus will notice immediately. Consider whether the closing needs one clause — not a footnote, not an explanation, but a single phrase — that makes this rewrite explicit rather than silent." That fix has not been made in the current draft. The substitution is the book's intervention and its best editorial decision, but it remains silent. A reader familiar with Camus will either feel the frisson of recognition or, if they don't catch it, miss the book's central reformulation entirely. This must be addressed before delivery.

E. Ch7 calls back to specific named moments from each of Ch1–6

Verdict: PASS

The callbacks appear in the section "Everything That Came Before This Room" (beginning line 182 of Ch7) and in subsequent paragraphs. Each is specific to named moments, not generic themes:

Required callback	Ch7 passage	Verdict
Ch1 (rats, PAG)	"The same ancient brain structure — the periaqueductal gray...mediates the 50-kilohertz chirp in the rat and the involuntary laughter of a human at something genuinely funny...Panksepp had spent his career arguing...a 2023 cross-species neuroimaging study confirmed..."	PASS — specific
Ch2 (oldest jokes)	"Chapter 2 documented the oldest jokes we have — the Philogelos, the Sumerian schoolboy texts, the Aristophanes that doesn't work anymore and the doctor jokes that still do...Both doors have always been open."	PASS — specific
Ch3 (banana peel/hierarchy)	"Zeus with his crown caught in his own ladder, and Buster Keaton at two inches of clearance, and the Busu servants eating their master's sugar...The banana peel hits the face and then the face dissolves."	PASS — specific named moments
Ch4 (in-group/belonging)	"twelve men in a scanner laugh together, the molecular warmth of two nervous systems firing on the same joke at the same moment" and the "widest circle" formulation	PASS — Finnish scanner specifically named
Ch5 (gallows humor/extremity)	Frankl quoted directly: "Humor, more than anything else in the human make-up, can afford an aloofness and an ability to rise above any situation, even if only for a few seconds." Also: "the unnamed woman at Auschwitz laughing about her free haircut, Panksepp in Ohio and Marchetti in Ravenna"	PASS — Frankl quoted with full precision
Ch6 (visual floor)	"Milko Marchetti's photograph of a red squirrel going headfirst into a hole in a tree in a park in Ravenna...the 1808 British Library catalogers finding the marginalia...still looking at these images and finding them ludicrous"	PASS — both named specifically

All six callbacks are present, specific to named moments, and build in the correct sequence (body → ancient jokes → status/hierarchy → belonging → extremity → visual floor).

One secondary observation: the editorial report notes the book-as-setup/Ch7-as-punchline structural echo is "gestured at but not fully executed" — the draft says "you just read a setup and a punchline...if you have read the prologue to this book, you know exactly what just happened" but does not state the more explicit version the spec wanted. This is a minor issue; the echo is present even if it could be stronger.

SECTION 3: TITLE ALTERNATIVES AUDIT

Verdict: PASS

specs/title_alternatives.md contains exactly five alternatives:

Why Rats Laugh
The Oldest Joke in the World
Something Which Has Never Occurred Since Time Immemorial
The Two-Beat Animal: A Natural History of the Joke
Laughter: A User's Guide (You Already Installed It)

Count check: 5 alternatives. Criterion is 3–5. PASS.

Distinctness check: Each is evaluated against the working title The Joke We All Share:

Why Rats Laugh: Distinctly different register — biological, arresting, slightly absurdist. The "we" warmth is absent; replaced by scientific specificity and a trick question. Different enough. PASS.
The Oldest Joke in the World: Historical/archaeological angle, not social/conspiratorial. Emphasizes temporal depth rather than shared humanity. Different enough. PASS.
Something Which Has Never Occurred Since Time Immemorial: Absurdist, inside-joke for readers who recognize the Sumerian text, maximally opaque to those who don't. Radically different register — pompous and self-aware where the working title is warm and social. PASS.
The Two-Beat Animal: A Natural History of the Joke: Scientific framing ("natural history"), analytical register. The subtitle does what The Joke We All Share does tonally, but the main title is structural and cold by comparison. Different enough. PASS.
Laughter: A User's Guide (You Already Installed It): Most explicitly biological/functional. The main title is category-direct (like a manual), the parenthetical is where the argument lives. Different register from the working title, more utilitarian. PASS.

All five are genuinely distinct from the working title in tone, angle, or register. No two alternatives are duplicates of each other. The summary note at the end of the spec document confirms this and provides rationale. Criterion fully met.

SECTION 4: WORD COUNT AUDIT

Word counts computed by Python character-split method from the .md source files (includes markdown formatting but minimal headers/separators, so represents a close approximation of prose word count):

Chapter	Actual count	Target range	Verdict
Prologue	1,338 words	800–1,200	FAIL — over by ~138 words
Ch1 — Born Laughing	7,449 words	7,000–9,000	PASS
Ch2 — The Oldest Joke	6,793 words	7,000–9,000	FAIL — under by ~207 words
Ch3 — Banana Peels	7,087 words	7,000–9,000	PASS (near floor)
Ch4 — You Had to Be There	6,671 words	7,000–9,000	FAIL — under by ~329 words
Ch5 — The Last Laugh	8,029 words	7,000–9,000	PASS
Ch6 — Silence Is Funny	7,003 words	7,000–9,000	PASS (essentially at floor)
Ch7 — Spam Spam Spam	8,176 words	7,000–9,000	PASS

Summary: 4 of 8 pass cleanly. 4 require attention:

Prologue: 1,338 words against a 1,200-word ceiling. The overage is modest — approximately one substantial paragraph. The editorial report identifies the candidate for cutting: the closing disclaimer paragraph ("One clarification: this book is not arguing that everything is funny everywhere...") is flagged as "slightly protective" and "pre-emptive defense" that "blunts the invitation." Removing or condensing it would bring the prologue within range while also improving it editorially.
Ch2: 6,793 words against a 7,000-word floor. The chapter is 207 words short. The editorial report recommends trimming the Chunyu Kun section and the Davila Ross duplication — making Ch2 shorter, not longer. If those cuts are made, the chapter drops further below the floor. The floor is a target, not a hard constraint, but this should be flagged: Ch2's word count may worsen if the critical redundancy fixes are applied. Either the floor needs to flex slightly for Ch2, or the Wikan Balinese/Egyptian comparison (which the editorial report correctly flags as under-treated) should receive the expansion it deserves and would bring the chapter back above 7,000.
Ch4: 6,671 words against a 7,000-word floor. The chapter is 329 words short. The editorial report recommends cutting the duplicated Koshare/Heyoka passage (one of its two appearances) and abbreviating the Gottfried/Aristocrats material (which should be cut to a reference in Ch4 and handled fully in Ch5). These cuts would make Ch4 shorter still. The word-count floor will not be met if the recommended editorial fixes are applied without compensating additions. Note: Ch4's editorial report recommends fixing the Ch4→Ch5 transition (the "jokes whose punchlines are the universe itself" promise that points to absurdism rather than gallows humor). A revision of that closing paragraph in the direction of more accurate forward momentum might add the 329 words organically.
Note on counts: The source files include a source-note section at the end of Ch3 (*Source notes: Zillmann & Cantor...) and Ch5, and similar in Ch7. These were counted in the word totals. If publication format excludes these from chapter wordcount (placing them as endnotes), the body wordcounts for Ch3, Ch5, and Ch7 are slightly lower than reported: approximately 100–200 words lower depending on the chapter. This does not affect the PASS/FAIL determinations for those chapters at their current counts.

SECTION 5: CROSS-CHAPTER AND STRUCTURAL ISSUES

These are carried forward from the editorial report. This section confirms their status against the drafts read.

Critical unfixed issues (confirmed present in drafts)

1. Gottfried/Aristocrats duplication (Ch4 and Ch5)

CONFIRMED. Ch4 devotes a section ("The Gottfried Pivot") to the September 29, 2001 Friars Club/Gottfried story, and then Ch5 opens with the same story running for two substantial paragraphs. The editorial report flags this as the manuscript's most visible structural problem. Both accounts tell the same story (18 days after 9/11, Friars Club roast of Hugh Hefner, 9/11 joke bombed, pivoted to The Aristocrats, set lasted twelve minutes). The Ch4 version is shorter and explicitly says "Chapter 5 will give this moment the full treatment it deserves." This is the correct structural direction: Ch5 should own it, Ch4 should reduce to a reference. But as currently drafted, Ch4's treatment is already substantial enough to tell the whole story, which means the Ch5 reader has already had the full account. This fix remains outstanding.

2. Davila Ross ape-laughter study (Ch1 and Ch2)

CONFIRMED. The acoustic phylogeny result — that laughter similarities across primate species track genetic relatedness — is given full treatment in Ch1 and then summarized in compressed but still-full form in Ch2. The Ch2 version does not signal that this was covered. This fix remains outstanding.

3. Camus substitution not owned in text (Ch7 final line)

CONFIRMED. See Section 2D above. This is a FAIL. Fix required.

4. Sukumar Ray example not demonstrated (Ch7)

CONFIRMED. Ray receives three paragraphs with no quotable example from Abol Tabol. The Hukum-Hukum creature is described in behavioral terms but nothing is quoted or rendered in a way the reader can feel. The Kharms parallel (two traditions, one decade, opposite ends of Eurasia) requires both examples to land at comparable specificity; currently only Kharms lands. Fix required.

5. Ch4 → Ch5 transition (the "cosmic absurdism" false promise)

CONFIRMED. Ch4's closing paragraph ends: "The warmest circle...is tested hardest not in banquet halls or monastic councils or Rat Pack dressing rooms, but under genuine pressure...the joke told in the shadow of genuine catastrophe...it is time to talk about what happens when the thing the joke is about is real, immediate, and sitting in the room with everyone." This is accurate — it points correctly at Ch5's gallows humor. The specific phrase "jokes whose punchlines are the universe itself" from the editorial report does not appear in the current draft; it appears the transition was already revised or the editorial report was describing the previous draft. The current Ch4 ending accurately previews Ch5. This issue may already be resolved in the current draft. No further action needed on this specific point.

6. Koshare/Heyoka duplication within Ch4

CONFIRMED. The Koshare and Heyoka appear in the "How a Circle Gets Drawn" section and then again in "The Jester's License" section, both times as examples of ritual clown traditions that use a frame to license transgression. The points made are similar: play signal extended to social institution, same mechanism as Keltner's fraternity brothers. One occurrence should be cut. Fix required.

SECTION 6: OVERALL VERDICT

Scoring summary

Criterion	Verdict
General reader laughs, learns, believes (Criterion 1)	PASS
Non-Western + historical + counter-example per chapter (Criterion 2)	PASS with Ray flag
Five boundaries addressed substantively (Criterion 3)	PASS
Thesis lands emotionally in final chapter (Criterion 4)	PASS
No listicles, throughline per chapter (Criterion 5)	PASS
No chapter opens with thesis statement	PASS (all 8)
Prologue joke lands before analysis	PASS
Ch7 final paragraphs as feeling not argument	PASS
Camus substitution owned in text	FAIL
Ch7 callbacks to Ch1–6 specific moments	PASS
Title alternatives: 3–5, each distinct	PASS
Word count — Prologue	FAIL (over by ~138 words)
Word count — Ch1	PASS
Word count — Ch2	FAIL (under by ~207 words; will worsen with editorial cuts)
Word count — Ch3	PASS
Word count — Ch4	FAIL (under by ~329 words; will worsen with editorial cuts)
Word count — Ch5	PASS
Word count — Ch6	PASS
Word count — Ch7	PASS

OVERALL VERDICT: NEEDS FURTHER WORK

The manuscript is in strong shape. The thesis is coherent and well-argued, the voice holds across chapters, the emotional landing works, and the structural architecture is largely sound. This is not a second-draft problem. But three issues block delivery:

BLOCKING ISSUES (must fix before delivery):

Camus substitution is not owned in text (Ch7 final line). One sentence or clause acknowledging "not happy — laughing" is required. Without it, the book's central reformulation is invisible to readers who know Camus and misses its own argument for readers who don't. This is a single sentence fix.
Gottfried/Aristocrats story is fully narrated in both Ch4 and Ch5. Ch4's "Gottfried Pivot" section must be reduced to a forward reference. Ch5 is the correct home for the full treatment. As currently drafted, Ch5's opening loses half its impact because the reader has already heard the story.
Sukumar Ray has no demonstrable example. The Kharms-Ray structural parallel is the chapter's second most important argument (after the Fliegender Zirkus failure case) and it currently runs on assertion. One quotable Ray example — even "the Hukum-Hukum issues simultaneous and contradictory commands: [example]" — is the minimum required for the parallel to land.

RECOMMENDED FIXES (improve quality but do not block delivery):

Davila Ross ape-laughter duplication: Ch2's account should reduce to a single reference back to Ch1.
Koshare/Heyoka duplication within Ch4: cut one of the two occurrences.
Prologue word count: trim the closing disclaimer paragraph (~138 words) to bring the prologue within the 1,200-word ceiling. The editorial report's case for cutting this paragraph is also editorially correct independent of the word count.
Ch2 and Ch4 word counts: both chapters will fall further below the 7,000-word floor once critical cuts are made. Consider expanding the Wikan Balinese/Egyptian comparison in Ch5 (which both the editorial report and this audit flag as under-treated) and/or revising the Ch4 closing paragraph to point more accurately at Ch5 — both moves would add words where the prose genuinely needs more work, bringing counts back toward the floor organically.
The "I want to slow down here, because we are approaching something" transition in Ch7 (before the callbacks section) telegraphs the architecture too explicitly. Worth cutting or replacing with a line that simply begins the callbacks.

Once issues 1–3 are resolved, this manuscript is ready to deliver.

Verification report prepared March 15, 2026. All drafts read from: /Users/primus/git/teaparty/projects/humor-book/.worktrees/session-171017--i-would-like-a-book-on-the-uni/drafts/ INTENT.md read from: /Users/primus/git/teaparty/projects/humor-book/INTENT.md editorial_report.md read from: /Users/primus/git/teaparty/projects/humor-book/.worktrees/session-171017--i-would-like-a-book-on-the-uni/editorial/editorial_report.md