Initial commit: tungsten's memory tree

1 files changed, 14 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/feedback_feedreader_no_implicit_read.md b/feedback_feedreader_no_implicit_read.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6465409
--- /dev/null
+++ b/feedback_feedreader_no_implicit_read.md
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+---
+name: feedback-feedreader-no-implicit-read
+description: "In the Feeds app, only explicit actions (opening an article) should mark it read -- never scrolling or merely displaying it"
+metadata: 
+  node_type: memory
+  type: feedback
+  originSessionId: 375c858e-e817-41e8-a076-7920d22eab2b
+---
+
+Scrolling the article list must never mark anything as read. Only opening an article (or an explicit future "mark read" action) should change read state.
+
+**Why:** Earlier I proactively built "mark as read once an article scrolls above the viewport" (standard Feedly/Reeder-style behavior) in response to an ambiguously-worded request ("auto mark displayed articles as read"). Peter later reversed this outright ("scrolling the list view shouldn't mark things as read") -- the conservative, explicit-action-only interpretation was correct and the proactive assumption was wrong.
+
+**How to apply:** This is a specific instance of a broader pattern with this user: don't assume a well-known convention from other apps in that category is what he wants just because a request is phrased generically -- prefer the more conservative/explicit interpretation, or ask, rather than importing a competitor's UX default. Applies broadly to the feedreader project (see [[project_feedreader]]), and worth weighing on other ambiguous asks too.