Audience-Jury Seat Map Annotation Afteruse Receipt / 观众陪审座位图批注后用回执线

The audience-jury version of the Chapter One public trial creates a concrete house problem. The sponsor camera lane widens after seating begins, so Jao Min marks rows B7-B12 and moves a caption-access juror through a different ingress. Her annotation proves where bodies were moved and why the jury floorplan no longer matches the clean broadcast frame.

After the trial, a sponsor recap and editor try to consume that same annotation as group broadcast consent. The line asks whether a real house-flow record can remain useful without becoming permission from every patron inside the marked block.

Existing canon anchor

This is a downstream continuation, not a free-floating paper artifact:

1. storyteller-event-12-license-recall chooses seat_audience_jury and arms the seat-map afteruse pressure.
2. Jao Min’s jury-nonattendance storyline resolves whether her ingress evidence and actual floorplan survive.
3. storyteller-rite-10-public-trial consumes the audience-jury format and completes the public trial.
4. Seat Map Annotation Afteruse Claim opens only if Jao Min, the real jury-room floorplan, her nonattendance docket, and the Chapter Two reader are still in hand.
5. Seat Map Annotation Afteruse Review records one of seven exclusive result codes.
6. The false branch arms False Seat Map Annotation Default, which must be resolved as a durable recovery-only state.

The company-trial format never opens this line. Jao Min’s sponsor-buyoff or a branch that discards the real floorplan can make it missable.

Why this is not another seat-map lane

Nearby lane	Boundary
Auditor Seat Map Afteruse Receipt	an auditor’s saved sightline row being stretched into attendance or witness-custody authority
Seat Map Overprint Afteruse Receipt	an old physical map being reused after the live room and access configuration changed
This storyline	Jao Min’s live audience-jury movement annotation being converted into group broadcast consent after the public trial

This line fails if Jao Min, the audience-jury floorplan, and the public-trial result can all be removed without changing the implementation.

State-triggered entry

entry_state_required:
  source_event: storyteller-event-12-license-recall
  source_event_option: seat_audience_jury
  public_trial_complete: true
  jury_nonattendance_disposition_recorded: true
  seat_map_afteruse_pending: true
  real_jury_floorplan_in_hand: true
  jao_min_usher_card_in_hand: true
  jury_nonattendance_docket_in_hand: true
  chapter_two_future_reader_in_hand: true
  no_fixed_turn_trigger: true
  no_fixed_day_or_week_trigger: true
  no_raw_seat_count_trigger: true
  no_dashboard_or_lens_health_trigger: true

The entry event grants no universal consent and creates no invented named patron. The displaced caption-access juror remains a protected role row.

Storyline spine

Beat 1 - The audience jury becomes physical

The trial format promises public participation, but people still have to enter, sit, see captions, avoid the camera lane, and remain countable. Jao Min’s floorplan and nonattendance docket already prove that counted ballots and physical ingress can diverge.

Beat 2 - A house-flow annotation preserves the contradiction

Rows B7-B12 are marked when the sponsor camera lane widens. The annotation explains why one protected patron moved. It is good evidence of movement and bad evidence of consent.

Beat 3 - The recap reader asks for a clean crowd

The sponsor recap wants to show the public trial as a consensual audience event. The editor wants a continuity shortcut. Both point to the marked block and claim that anyone moved around the camera lane accepted broadcast use.

Beat 4 - The player resolves one exact posture

The review requires ten real cards, including Jao Min, the real floorplan, the original jury-nonattendance docket, and a branch-specific posture. Arbitrary evidence, missing hand cards, a mismatched posture, or a missing option must fail.

Beat 5 - Chapter Two reads the result

The review writes one exclusive seatMapAnnotationResultCode from 1 through 7. The result determines whether the future reader needs scoped house proof, a named reader, an usher bridge, separate consent, a protected patron notice, quarantine, or recovery.

Branch map

Code	Branch	Relief	Cost/scar	Future effect
1	certify_seat_map_scope	original house-flow proof survives	sponsor capture falls; route cost rises	seat_map_scope_required
2	restrict_annotation_reader	named house staff can still use the map	editor heat rises	named_reader_only
3	attach_usher_bridge	Jao Min proves physical movement	usher exposure and proof pressure rise	usher_bridge_required
4	split_house_flow_from_broadcast_consent	seating logistics remain usable	consent and archive work stay open	consent_reader_split
5	publish_displaced_patron_notice	protected patron may answer	sponsor heat rises	patron_notice_required
6	quarantine_seat_map_afteruse	false consent cannot enter the recap	archive debt and route cost rise	quarantined
7	false_seat_map_default	recap gets a temporarily clean crowd	false consent and patron harm harden	recovery_only plus default event

Missability and recovery

The line is missed if the player chooses the company-trial format, if the actual jury floorplan is discarded, if Jao Min’s row is bought off or absent, or if the public trial never reaches a resolved audience-jury state. A missed line does not imply audience consent; it means the annotation cannot become a usable route asset.

Recovery from result 7 requires resolving the false-default event. That event damages patron trust, increases sponsor capture, continuity liability, archive custody debt, and future route cost, and leaves a visible recovery_only flag.

Non-goals

• Not a raw seat-count or generic crowd-management check.
• Not a new Jao Min recruitment route; her existing character storyline owns that disposition.
• Not a universal jury, audience, broadcast, archive, or platform authority grant.
• Not satisfied without the public-trial source chain and real floorplan.
• Not satisfied by metadata-only branch claims.