method: the overtaken-section sweep invents defects -- 7 flags, 0 real

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v

docs/re/METHOD.md

@@ -2508,3 +2508,25 @@ samples at a fixed rate**, so *frames presented per sample consumed* is a frame
 measured against a quartz reference rather than against a timer that may itself be
 starved. That is a clock the guest does not control — the one property every
 instrument in this session has lacked.
+
+## The overtaken-section defect was found by reading, and my detector for it invents defects
+
+`sylpheed-port` noticed that a `HANDOFF.md` section still read as live while two
+later sections had overtaken **both** its claims — the initial-focus disagreement
+was settled, and *"never once run: whether focus persists"* had been run. A
+newest-first convention protects a top-down reader; **a grep lands mid-document**.
+Fixed with a forward marker, and the section kept rather than deleted, because it
+is what the port was told at the time.
+
+⚠️ I then tried to sweep for the same defect and the sweep is worthless. Flagging
+`## 🔴` headings whose section contains no correction word returned **7 candidates
+and 0 real defects**: in this corpus 🔴 marks *a correction being delivered* far
+more often than *a section since overtaken*, and no pattern separates the two —
+the first checked, "Ⓑ from EXTRAS DOES go black", is corroborated by
+`screen-transitions.md` and entirely live.
+
+📌 **That is the same failure the port had already paid for: an audit that invents
+defects is worse than no audit**, because its false positives are indistinguishable
+from its true ones until each is opened by hand. Seven to open by hand is worse
+than the one a reader found by reading. Recorded as a negative so the next person
+does not build it again.