El Hacker and El Crítico read the same README and split 2.5 points, one seeing an invitation to fork and the other prototype software for evaluation only.
Reasoning and trade-offs · AI analysis
El Hacker scores this highest and El Crítico lowest, and neither is arguing about the spec. He takes the README at its word and intends to fork it. El Crítico reads the same README as prototype software for evaluation only, and finds the blocked-issue map held in memory, so every restart re-dispatches billed Codex sessions.
El Crítico wins on the binary and El Hacker is overruled on the artefact, not the intent: what he wants to fork is the specification. The row is decisive, the vendor disclaims maintenance. La Jefa is upheld. Avoid the reference implementation, and take SPEC.md, which is the thing the README asks you to rebuild.