eigentime.org — Operational Dry Run

Background and scope

eigentime.org is a bilingual (Chinese/English) professional content site covering B2B export SEO, AI coding, web development, and public case reviews. It is not an industrial B2B manufacturer or product catalog site.

This execution validated the complete Operational v0.2 workflow — crawling, evidence registration, question matrices, human review queues, URL actions, and time tracking — on real public content where the site owner had full authority to review findings.

Evidence status distribution

Typical findings

• 1. Resume and professional-history evidence strength

  Strongest evidence: public downloadable resources with versions, dates, licenses, filenames, and SHA-256 integrity patterns. Weakest evidence: business-results loop closure, independent client/employer authorization, collaboration terms, and customer project data terms.

  Action: Add explicit collaboration boundary page or statement clarifying the site is capability demonstration only.
• 2. Bilingual sitemap and hreflang gaps

  Chinese and English online resumes exist but are not in the sitemap. Missing mutual hreflang annotations and valid lastmod timestamps reduce discoverability and indexing confidence.

  Action: Add both resume variants to sitemap with proper hreflang and lastmod tags.
• 3. Commercial terms and service boundary

  The site presents professional work and capabilities but does not specify pricing, scope, capacity, timelines, SLAs, legal entity, or payment terms. Visitors may infer availability without actual service readiness.

  Action: Add "Collaboration Boundaries" page stating the site is for demonstration; real engagements require explicit scoping and agreement.
• 4. Privacy and data-processing completeness

  Visitor privacy and client project data handling are not clearly separated. Missing minimum-privilege, storage, retention/deletion, subprocessor, incident notification, and access-revocation boundaries.

  Action: Split privacy policy into visitor analytics and client project data sections with explicit data lifecycle and control statements.
• 5. Third-party connection disclosure

  Giscus/GitHub comment integration creates third-party connections that may not be obvious to visitors before interaction.

  Action: Disclose Giscus/GitHub connection before first comment load or implement click-to-load pattern.

Priority URL-level actions

1. Add bilingual resumes to sitemap with hreflang and lastmod

   Affects: /en/resume/, /zh/resume/, sitemap.xml

2. Create "Collaboration Boundaries" page

   Clarify that pricing, capacity, and terms require explicit negotiation; site is capability demonstration only.

3. Separate visitor privacy from client project data handling

   Define storage, retention, deletion, subprocessors, and access revocation for each category.

4. Update WebRTC tutorial uBlock Origin guidance

   Desktop uBlock Origin option was removed in v1.38 per official project documentation; update or remove outdated steps.

5. Fix or remove 404 NodePurity repository link

   Add version, threat model, tests, limits, and license or remove the broken link.

6. Add dates and boundaries to quantified claims

   Projects claiming "50+ sites", "UAV 0→243 Top10", and "5794/254 cases" need dates, definitions, anonymized manifests/hashes, personal contribution boundaries, and authorization levels.

What was left as Unknown

The audit explicitly preserved Unknown status for five questions where public evidence was insufficient:

• Independent client or employer authorization for named projects and results
• Actual business-outcome loop closure (revenue, conversion, implementation adoption)
• Client project data handling terms in executed agreements
• Insurance, liability limits, and jurisdiction for commercial engagements
• Real-time availability, capacity, and current service offerings

Methodology learnings

This dry run validated that the 21-sheet Operational v0.2 workflow functions correctly for structured evidence collection, human-review queuing, and URL-level action prioritization. Key insights:

• The evidence taxonomy (observed, attested, verified, calculated, inferred, unknown) successfully prevented false precision
• High-risk review flags correctly identified claims requiring owner approval before public recommendation
• SHA-256 hashing and timestamp preservation enable future retesting
• Deterministic formulas prevented arithmetic drift in scoring
• The workflow produced actionable findings without requiring backend access, passwords, or private analytics

Gate status

Scorecard result: STOP

This is the correct result. Twenty high-risk items still require real human approval; the owner has not accepted any actions with target dates; no retest evidence exists; no client payment exists; no existing backlog comparison is available; actual human labor time was not reliably measured.

This execution demonstrates operational completeness but does not count toward Stage 0 commercial validation gates.