{
  "registry_version": "2026.08.2",
  "data": {
    "title": "Communication mismatch or tone friction in panel",
    "status": "active",
    "evidence_ids": [
      "EVD-006"
    ],
    "content": "# Communication mismatch or tone friction in panel\n\nNoticeable divergence in communication style, pacing, or terminology during live panel discussions.\n\n### Diagnostic Non-Inferences\n- Does not prove candidate lacks teamwork skills globally.",
    "id": "A-010",
    "type": "artifact",
    "summary": "Noticeable divergence in communication style, pacing, or terminology during live panel discussions.",
    "stages": [
      "recruiter",
      "team"
    ],
    "evidence_level": "supported",
    "probes": [
      {
        "id": "PROBE-A-010-1",
        "action": "Request explicit feedback on collaborative dynamic from recruiter.",
        "expected_signal": "Clarifies whether friction was perceived as attitude issue or stylistic preference.",
        "cost": "low"
      }
    ],
    "specimens": [
      {
        "kind": "transcript",
        "label": "Panel discussion, transcript fragment",
        "context": "minute 22, architecture round",
        "lines": [
          {
            "speaker": "Interviewer A",
            "at": "22:05",
            "text": "So when you say the write path is eventually consistent, what does the client see?",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Candidate",
            "at": "22:14",
            "text": "Depends on the read. If it goes through the cache it can be stale by up to the TTL; if it goes to the primary it is current.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Interviewer A",
            "at": "22:26",
            "text": "Sorry, I think we are talking past each other. I meant from the user perspective.",
            "tell": true
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Candidate",
            "at": "22:33",
            "text": "Ah — then: they may see their own write missing for a second or two.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Interviewer A",
            "at": "22:38",
            "text": "That is what I was after.",
            "tell": false
          }
        ],
        "reading": "The disagreement was about which layer the question lived in, not about the answer. The content was right at both levels."
      },
      {
        "kind": "email",
        "label": "Panel feedback",
        "subject": "Feedback — architecture round",
        "lines": [
          {
            "text": "Technically solid throughout.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "text": "The panel felt communication was not always calibrated to the audience — answers went to implementation detail where a product-level framing was wanted.",
            "tell": true
          }
        ],
        "reading": "Read against the transcript this is one exchange generalised into a trait. Both readings fit the same recording, which is exactly why the observation is not a verdict."
      }
    ],
    "non_inferences": [
      "Does not prove candidate lacks teamwork skills globally."
    ]
  }
}