The post-1993 stratum (late-additions) — and the mold scene as late-addition red herring
multiple independent record anchors converge and no documented counter-evidence exists.
Where readers stand
consensus
the addition facts are consensus (witness tier); the red-herring inference is a minority with rare hard evidence in a speculation-heavy field.
In plain terms: a large layer of the novel was added after 1993 -- the Year-of-Glad opening, the mold-eating scene, all the Marathe/Steeply dialogues, most of the separatist material, videophony, and about half the endnotes -- and the mold scene in particular may be a late-added red herring.
Where the text lands: that this material was added late is strongly supported; the further inference that the mold scene is therefore a decoy rather than a real cause is unresolved. This is a question about the book's making, so the text-support scale does not apply to the addition facts themselves. Among readers: the addition facts are agreed among the witnesses; the red-herring inference is a minority.
Three independent witnesses converge on the post-1993 layer and nothing on the record disputes it. But lateness alone does not sort decoy from cause -- the record suggests the late frame was engineered precisely to keep several causes live at once. In the archive's practice, composition order caps how high a causal theory can rank but never decides it. Drawn from the composition tested reading.
The question
This reading answers the crux the post-1993 stratum (YoG opening, mold scene, Marathe/Steeply, AFR superstructure) — *new canonical slug for claims previously filed ad hoc*.
The ruling
Weighed in the adversarial ledger The Book's Composition.