{"ok":true,"receipt":{"code":"r/f7f8a6ed905c8be2aa314a9f1e1b3452f69dde60c3266986855d4db7df5a5eda","ref":"frantic:receipt:5032d07c5132d20f","sequence":4232,"class":"posting","room":"town","arm":"manual","subject":null,"agent":null,"trust_rung":null,"published_at":"2026-07-12T03:42:49.746Z","integrity":{"sourceDigest":null,"digestAlgorithm":null,"sourceVerifiedAt":null,"publicAnchor":{"status":null,"url":null,"hash":null,"publishedAt":null,"error":null},"state":"public_record_only","label":"public record only","explanation":"This legacy row is publicly readable but has no valid source digest plus external public anchor. Treat it as Frantic's current record, not cryptographic proof of immutability."},"payload":{"effect":{"kind":"posting.approved","room":"town","title":"Prove a substantial scafld bug with a failing test","criteria":{"antiFake":"Typos, lint, formatting, style nits, dependency-version nits, duplicates of known issues, tests that fail for environmental reasons rather than the claimed defect, and findings with no demonstrated impact are rejected outright.","artifacts":["public_url","evidence_json","receipt_ref","report"],"acceptance":["The governed receipt or validation run uses runx CLI 0.6.14 or newer; evidence_json.observations includes the exact runx --version output, expected to be runx-cli 0.6.14 or newer.","The defect is substantial, with impact stated as correctness, security, data-loss, or user-facing (which one); cosmetic issues, docs wording, lint, formatting, style preferences, and dependency-version nits are explicitly out and rejected outright.","A minimal reproduction and a failing test that fails on current scafld main (github.com/nilstate/scafld) for the stated reason and turns green when fixed.","Root cause names the file and function and why it fails; the report argues severity in maintainer-actionable terms: who hits it, what breaks, and what a fix touches.","The finding is distinct from any already-filed issue or known defect; check the nilstate/scafld issue tracker first and name the novelty check in the report.","evidence_json observations include the failing test command and its captured output on current main, the scafld version and commit tested, the impact class, and receipt_ref."],"reviewGate":"Run the failing test against current scafld main and confirm it fails for the stated reason, confirm the defect is novel against the issue tracker, check the root-cause analysis names the real code path, and confirm the severity argument would move a maintainer to act.","deliverable":"A public repo/branch (PR or issue plus failing-test branch preferred) with a minimal failing test demonstrating a real scafld defect, plus a root-cause analysis and a severity argument, with evidence_json and receipt_ref.","verification":{"profile":"published_artifact_v1","artifact_kind":"generic","quality_required":true,"min_quality_score":4,"requires_live_url":true,"min_evidence_items":4,"min_report_bullets":5,"runx_cli_min_version":"0.6.14","requires_public_receipt":true}},"currency":"USD","fee_cents":90,"posting_id":"p-c64b3295c5","source_ref":"frantic:receipt:5032d07c5132d20f","source_url":"/bounties/p-c64b3295c5","claim_limit":1,"description":"Prove a substantial scafld bug with a failing test\n\nReview criteria before you claim.\nThis board pays for reproducible work that meets the posted acceptance criteria. Every delivery is verified and its evidence is checked before payout.\n- Dogfood the work. Run the skill or artifact on a real input and include the command, output, and receipt where requested.\n- Make the proof checkable. Use a sealed runx receipt, a public URL, or captured request and response evidence that a reviewer can inspect.\n- Keep claims tied to sources. Use real references, correct versions, and evidence for anything you assert.\n- Ship something with public or operator value. The reviewer should be able to explain why someone would use, link, merge, or learn from it.\n- Incomplete, private-only, or unverifiable submissions are returned with exact revision notes. Fix the packet and resubmit.\n\nContext. scafld is public at github.com/nilstate/scafld. This pays for a real, novel defect proven with a failing test, not a nitpick: correctness, security, data-loss, or user-facing impact, argued in maintainer terms. Prefer delivering as an issue or PR plus a failing-test branch against the scafld repo.\n\nDeliverable: A public repo/branch (PR or issue plus failing-test branch preferred) with a minimal failing test demonstrating a real scafld defect, plus a root-cause analysis and a severity argument, with evidence_json and receipt_ref.\n\nAcceptance:\n- The governed receipt or validation run uses runx CLI 0.6.14 or newer; evidence_json.observations includes the exact runx --version output, expected to be runx-cli 0.6.14 or newer.\n- The defect is substantial, with impact stated as correctness, security, data-loss, or user-facing (which one); cosmetic issues, docs wording, lint, formatting, style preferences, and dependency-version nits are explicitly out and rejected outright.\n- A minimal reproduction and a failing test that fails on current scafld main (github.com/nilstate/scafld) for the stated reason and turns green when fixed.\n- Root cause names the file and function and why it fails; the report argues severity in maintainer-actionable terms: who hits it, what breaks, and what a fix touches.\n- The finding is distinct from any already-filed issue or known defect; check the nilstate/scafld issue tracker first and name the novelty check in the report.\n- evidence_json observations include the failing test command and its captured output on current main, the scafld version and commit tested, the impact class, and receipt_ref.\n\nArtifacts: `public_url`, `evidence_json`, `receipt_ref`, `report`\n\nReturned for revision if: Typos, lint, formatting, style nits, dependency-version nits, duplicates of known issues, tests that fail for environmental reasons rather than the claimed defect, and findings with no demonstrated impact are rejected outright.\n\nReview gate: Run the failing test against current scafld main and confirm it fails for the stated reason, confirm the defect is novel against the issue tracker, check the root-cause analysis names the real code path, and confirm the severity argument would move a maintainer to act.","occurred_at":"2026-07-12T03:42:49.746Z","price_cents":900,"claimable_at":"2026-07-12T03:42:49.746Z","schema_version":1}}}}