1008 pass (972 before). The tests worth reading first are the ones that pin a
property no screen would look different without:
* **The edit window is decided on the server, twice.** One test proves the read
path stamps `canEdit` per post per viewer; another proves the WRITE path
re-derives it from `created_at` and refuses a stale edit even though the
client was told it could — because a time-bounded permission must not take its
clock from the party it bounds.
* **A locked thread refuses staff too**, asserted over member, leader and staff
in one loop, at 409 rather than 403: well-formed request, refusing state.
* **delete → restore is reversible for images.** Without the second half of the
pair a restored post returns its words and loses its pictures a retention
window later, silently — the test asserts both calls and that `hide` makes
neither.
* **Post moderation recomputes the thread's counters** rather than nudging them;
the test runs hide → unhide → hide, which is the cycle a delta gets wrong.
* **acceptance: nothing in the report model is reachable by a Team leader.** The
negative property is the whole point of §5.6 and negatives are what nobody
notices going, so it is asserted directly — the module's function surface is
pinned, and `queue`/`handle` are checked not to mention leadership at all. If
a leader-facing queue is ever wanted it is the org lead's decision, and this
test is what makes somebody ask.
* **A report never changes the content it is about**, proved by stubbing every
mutation the forum has to throw. If filing a report touched a status then
"report" would BE moderation, and the first person to work that out would have
found a way to hide anything on the site.
The test suite caught one real defect: `describeTarget` returned `undefined` for a
hard-deleted target, and `undefined` is dropped by JSON.stringify — so the
documented `target: null` would have reached clients as an absent key.
Two phase-4 tests were updated rather than added to, both because phase 5 changed
what they describe: `canPost` split into `canPost` (open a discussion, everyone)
and `canAnnounce` (leaders), and `discussion` is no longer a refused thread type.
Phase 5's four new player routes are added to acceptance criterion 2's list, so
"with the forum off every forum route 404s" keeps covering the whole surface.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
TEAMS.md §5.6. **Core has had no user-facing report flow of any kind** — the
`moderation`, `mod_notes` and `appeals` tables are all either staff-initiated or
Discord-sanction-shaped, and nothing anywhere let a member say "this is a
problem". That was survivable while every piece of content on the site came from
staff; phase 5 lets players write to each other, so it stops being.
The gap has a specific shape: leaders moderate their own Team's forum, and a
Team's leaders are exactly the people who will not report their own Team. So the
whole point of this queue is a path that routes AROUND a Team's own leadership.
Org lead settled it on 2026-08-18: **reports are site administration only** —
there is no leader-facing view of this queue, not even a read-only one scoped to
their own Team. §5.6's "a leader may also see and act on reports for their own
Team" is not implemented and is not deferred.
`content_reports` is deliberately generic — `target_type` is a VARCHAR so a wiki
page or a news comment becomes a value rather than a table — and the queue is
mounted beside appeals under /admin/moderation rather than under Teams, because a
staffer working a queue should have one place to work.
**§5.6's literal unique key has a defect and this does not copy it.** Written as
(target_type, target_id, reporter_user_id, status) it makes CLOSED rows collide
with each other too: reporter reports a post, staff dismiss it, the behaviour
recurs, they report again — and the second dismissal is an UPDATE into a tuple
that already exists, so working the queue starts throwing duplicate-key errors on
the first repeat reporter. The key is on a generated `open_marker` instead, the
same trick `team_forum_grants.active_marker` uses: 1 while open, NULL once
closed, and NULLs are distinct — which is what §5.6's prose asks for, "one open
report per (target, reporter)".
Two other departures from the doc, both small and both flagged in the docs PR:
`handled_note`, because a queue whose resolution reason lives only in an
activity_log line is one where the next staffer to see a repeat report cannot
find out why the last was dismissed; and a CASCADE on `team_id`, so a deleted
Team does not leave a queue full of reports about content that no longer exists.
Also here: a report is filed against a target the model verifies really belongs to
the Team the request came through, or the queue's per-Team filter would quietly be
lying; the queue resolves every row's target in three batched reads rather than
N+1, which is §5.6's fourth rule (uploader, size and sniffed type without
hunting) actually paying for §5.5.4's attribution table; a target that has since
been hard-deleted comes back null and the report still lists, because "somebody
reported this and by the time we looked it was gone" is a fact a moderator needs;
and every transition writes activity_log, `dismissed` included — a queue where
acting is audited and declining to act is not is one where the cheapest way to
make a report vanish leaves no trace.
`teams_forum_edit_window_minutes` gains its range validation on the admin settings
PUT and is seeded at 15, so the value on the settings screen is the value in
force. Route manifest and OpenAPI regenerated: 6 operations added, 0 lost.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
