Bodri, p 609, making a genuinely good argument:
You don't even have to worry that the direction you take is incorrect or that it changes, because with further merit and wisdom, you'll be able to see any errors in what you decide and mend your plans at any moment.
And then, nine pages later, the compressed version that will be the only part anybody remembers:
Just start and you're started, just act and it's already done!
[RESONANCE] The argument is right and the maxim is dangerous, and the distance between them is one paragraph.
The argument works because the errors it assumes are detectable and reversible. Every worked example in the chapter is of that kind: learn about water, contribute to blind charities, thread a needle. Low cost, easily abandoned, mostly transferable.
The maxim carries none of that. Just start and you're started travels intact into vocations, marriages, decade-long trainings and public positions — the class where the correction capability may well arrive on schedule and find the correction unavailable, or find that exercising it costs other people.
The missing clause is one line and would have cost nothing: start on the reversible things immediately, and take the irreversible ones slowly.
The general shape: a maxim carries no information about its own domain of application, and the argument that justified it does.
Compression strips the boundary conditions first, because boundary conditions are exactly the part that does not fit in a sentence. So the artefact that survives transmission is the one with the qualifications removed — and it survives because they were removed, since an unqualified sentence is quotable and a qualified one is not.
Same shape, different context. The Legacy of the Waves already carries an instance from this same book: the wave image printed twice, with the conditional clause only if you refrain from providing them with any further energy present in one printing and absent in the other — and the version that travels as the cross-tradition invariant is the one with the instruction stripped off.
Two independent instances in one corpus, of a maxim losing its condition in transmission. [n=2 SUGGESTIVE]
And the decisive test that would break it: find a compressed maxim in wide circulation that retained its boundary condition through transmission. If such cases are common, the stripping is not selection pressure but sloppiness.
This runs directly against the vault's own practice, and that is why it is worth keeping.
Every concept page here ends with a Live Edge — a sharpest-implication line, deliberately compressed and deliberately quotable. That is a maxim-manufacturing device. The argument sits above it and the compressed line is what will be lifted.
Promotion criterion: audit a sample of Live Edge lines against the pages above them and ask, for each, what boundary condition is in the page and not in the line, and would the line mislead somebody who read only it? If the answer is yes more than occasionally, the section's format needs a domain clause rather than the pages needing rewriting.
Next action: run the Live Edge audit on ten pages from this build; the finding, either way, is about the vault's format rather than about Bodri.