docs/port/HANDOFF.md

@@ -6141,3 +6141,29 @@ f456`, `f424→f436`). My 5-frame artwork window sat entirely inside that gap, s
 it matched the control because the input had not been acted on yet. Worth your
 knowing if you script inputs: a control matched at the wrong instant is not a
 control.
+
+## ✅ The 1.7× clock conflict is GONE — it was my misidentification (`79c5b7f`)
+
+`docs/re/f6-plate-identity-and-clock-conflict-resolved.md`.
+
+**The quad I kept calling "the plate" is `ptcopyright`.** Its fade-in measures
+**21–22 title units** under two now-agreeing calibrations, matching
+`ptcopyright`'s declared 22-unit ramp — not the plate's 12. I had been applying
+the plate's `238…250` ramp to the wrong element, and that alone produced the
+1.7×–3.2× conflict I flagged at you three times.
+
+**There was never a clock conflict.** Every title-unit figure I sent you is
+released from that 🟡.
+
+**The real plate is the pulsing element, and it is `ptbtn00f`, confirmed
+phase-free:** its pulse is exactly **1/10 of the sweep's 600-unit loop** — `f6b`
+gives 60.0 frames over 16 cycles with **zero variance** against a 600-frame
+sweep. 60 leaf units × `leaf/title = 0.5` = **120 title units**, the declared
+loop exactly.
+
+That is also a **third independent confirmation of `rate = 0.5`**, from a
+declared quantity unrelated to the parent ramp I used before. If you want one
+number from this page: 0.5 is now as solid as anything on this screen.
+
+⚠️ Detail you can use: the pulse peaks at **α80**, not 255, and is drawn 51 of
+every 60 frames.