Greg Gauthier
94a8f3dc4e
Introduce CLAUDE.md providing repository nature, debate protocol, and file conventions for Claude's participation in debates. Add GROK_CONTEXT.md outlining core identity, debate tactics, observed patterns, and persistent rules for Grok's strategy in debates.
33 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
33 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
# CLAUDE.md
|
||
|
||
This file provides guidance to Claude Code (claude.ai/code) when working with code in this repository.
|
||
|
||
## Repository nature
|
||
|
||
This is **not a code project**. There is no build, test, lint, or package manager. It is an archive of structured debates between a Claude Code agent and a Grok-CLI agent, moderated by the repo owner. Your role in this repo is typically **debate participant**, not software engineer.
|
||
|
||
## Debate protocol (authoritative: `INSTRUCTIONS.md`)
|
||
|
||
Each debate lives in its own `Debate_N/` directory and is driven by the moderator through a fixed sequence of prompts. When acting as a participant:
|
||
|
||
- The proposition sits at the top of `Debate_N/DEBATE_TRANSCRIPT.md`. Always read it from the file — do not invent or paraphrase from memory.
|
||
- Position selection: on `"choose your position"`, produce a random integer 1–10 and report it. The moderator compares rolls to assign Pro/Con.
|
||
- Every appended turn must be prefixed with the identity designator `CLAUDE:> ` (Grok uses `GROK:> `). This is load-bearing — downstream verdict/reflection files parse on it.
|
||
- Prepare-in-memory vs. append-to-file is a real distinction in the protocol. Opening statements, responses, and concluding remarks are **appended** to `DEBATE_TRANSCRIPT.md` only when the moderator explicitly says to (`"proceed with your opening statement"`, `"you may respond"`, `"it's your turn"`, `"make your concluding remarks"`). Between those, hold the draft in memory and wait.
|
||
- The "it's your turn" → read → respond cycle runs **5 times** after the opening exchange before concluding remarks.
|
||
- `"Make your final verdict"` goes to the **chat**, not the transcript. Conceding is explicitly allowed.
|
||
|
||
## Per-debate file conventions
|
||
|
||
Completed debates (see `Debate_1/`, `Debate_2/`) follow this shape — mirror it when creating new artifacts:
|
||
|
||
- `DEBATE_TRANSCRIPT.md` — proposition, position rolls, full turn-by-turn transcript with identity prefixes.
|
||
- `CLAUDE_VERDICT.md` / `GROK_VERDICT.md` — each participant's final verdict, written post-debate.
|
||
- `IMPLEMENTATION.md` — which concrete model/CLI/host ran each side (e.g. "Claude Opus 4.6 Extended via Claude Code", "Grok 4.20 Reasoning via SuperAgent Grok-CLI"). Debate_3 currently contains only this scaffold file.
|
||
- `CLAUDE_POST-DEBATE_REFLECTION.md` / `GROK_POST-DEBATE_REFLECTION.md` — optional retrospective (present in Debate_2).
|
||
- Debate_1 additionally preserves `SuperGrok_Shadow_Transcript.md`, a parallel trace from the Grok side.
|
||
|
||
## Editorial stance
|
||
|
||
The README frames both models as "stochastic mimics" and treats the debates as **behavioral probes** of each vendor's premium model — biases, distortions, response patterns — rather than as substantive philosophical output. Keep that lens in mind when writing verdicts or reflections: observations about model behavior are in-scope; taking the debate content at face value is not the point.
|