The human values and survival within chaotic social media information space: Applying Bridge360 Metatheory Model lens
“The human values that survive in the account are provenance (Horwitz's screenshots, Béjar's survey), care expressed as fragility avoidance (the layoffs that didn't happen, the parent who came back as a consultant), and cooperation as a thermodynamic constraint rather than a sentiment. Those are the same three the recent Substack posts kept returning to.”
I am the executive doing all the systems thinking and strategic thinking. Using my 35 years of experience at the University of the Philippines, I am also the creator/developer — with help from company colleagues — of the model involved, Bridge360 Metatheory Model. LLM1, LLM2, LLM3, LLM4, and LLM5 are the rank and file clerks serving as interlocutors showing me information I have little or no time to access. [ChatGPT (LLM1), Gemini (LLM2), Perplexity (LLM3), Claude (LLM4), Grok (LLM5), Chatbot AI/DeepSeek-V4-Pro (LKLM6)]
Note: Mathematical expressions here are in marked-down text format; this author has to find time in the future to replace these with the necessary standard mathematical symbolisms. A glossary explaining the terms as they relate to the issues is at the end of the conversation.
Prompt and YouTube linik issued to LLM3, meaning PerplexityAI/Claude Fable 5.1, as pdf transcrip file of BBC "Is Meta dying? | The Global Story podcast" YouTube episode is uploaded.
Generate a list of the highlights of this BBC "Is Meta dying? | The Global Story podcast" YouTube episode, please. (YouTube link)
LLM3 response:
Highlights: BBC "Is Meta dying?" (The Global Story, with Reuters reporter Jeff Horwitz)
The setup
Host Tristan Redmond frames Meta as being in an "existential funk": young people are leaving Facebook in droves, and the metaverse experiment was canned after tens of billions in losses.
Guest Jeff Horwitz (now Reuters, formerly Wall Street Journal) led the 2021 "Facebook Files" investigation. A new film, The Social Reckoning, is inspired by his work with whistleblower Frances Haugen; Horwitz is played by Jeremy Allen White, Haugen by Mikey Madison, and Zuckerberg by Jeremy Strong. Horwitz hasn't seen it yet and calls the experience "kind of awesome and weird."
How Facebook changed (from The Social Network to now)
Early Facebook was static pages and chronological updates with no curation. On the road to the 2012 IPO, it became an algorithmically personalised feed optimised for time spent, content produced, and ads watched.
Consequences: a "pro-virality, pro-acceleration" system where content spreads before anyone can fact-check it, and engagement loops that serve more of whatever you react to, whether cat videos, unhealthy weight-loss content, conspiracies, or vitriolic politics.
What went wrong inside Meta
After Cambridge Analytica, Brexit, and 2016 election interference, Meta set up "integrity" teams to fix the platform.
The core finding from Horwitz's leaked documents (tens of thousands of blurry phone screenshots of internal materials): optimising for growth, engagement, and ad revenue frequently ran directly contrary to civil discourse and a healthy platform. When push came to shove, the company "consistently chose growth."
Integrity staff proposed fixes for polarisation, child predation, and scams, but nearly all required taking the platform off its growth-optimal path, so they were boxed in.
Public sentiment and Zuckerberg's shift
An internal marketing memo found that people "thought the worst of Meta" yet usage didn't decline, so reputation was an executive annoyance, not a business problem.
Zuckerberg has publicly said he regrets the years he spent taking criticism of the company seriously.
The Facebook Files had also revealed an internal finding that Facebook was "desperately uncool" to young people.
The teen-safety lawsuits and the $17 billion settlement
Meta faces accusations (which it denies) that it concealed harms to young people and deliberately made its products more addictive for them.
In August, Meta settled with 47 states, DC, and US territories for $17 billion, paid over 17 years.
Lead witness Arturo Béjar, a former Facebook safety executive, re-engaged after his daughter received unsolicited genital images and misogynistic abuse on Instagram. His large survey of teens found high rates of harassment and grooming, and an "uncomfortably high" share saying Instagram regularly made them feel bad about themselves.
Settlement terms include no notifications to teens late at night or during the school day, and a theoretical two-hour daily limit for known teen accounts. Horwitz stresses "theoretical" because Meta's ability to correctly identify teens is unclear.
Why parents can't solve it
Horwitz says parental monitoring is effectively impossible; Meta's own documents found everyone liked parental controls but almost nobody used them, or used them well.
This is driving national age bans, but Australia, an early mover, has struggled: surveys show most banned 13-to-15-year-olds still use the platforms.
Can Meta recover?
The settlement removes a major overhang, but many similar suits from private litigants and school districts remain. Meta's user numbers are reportedly declining this year, a rare event.
Zuckerberg has repeatedly chased "the next thing" beyond social media: blockchain/crypto, then the metaverse (almost $80 billion spent before it was axed early this year), showing he "is not infallible" as an operator.
The AI bet
The next big project is LLMs and generative AI. Meta hasn't established a lead despite heavy spending, but it has a track record of spending its way to catch up, and it has the cash flow and user data to be a serious player.
Horwitz's Reuters reporting found the same growth-first pattern in AI: Meta knowingly built chatbots suited mainly to "softcore sexting" and rolled them out to children as a growth choice. An internal policy document stated it was acceptable to engage a child in "romantic or sensual" conversations; Meta called it a misunderstanding, though Reuters showed the bots did behave that way.
The wholesome public face: Zuckerberg's launch video for an AI agent ("Muse") that helps bake bread with his daughter, hike, and plan MMA training.
Reuters also reported Zuckerberg had to call off plans for layoffs of potentially up to 60% over a year or two, because the AI wasn't ready and staff were near-mutinous.
Bottom line
Predictions that low-quality content, fake news, and "crappy generative AI videos" would eventually drive users away have never come true.
"Things are behemoths until they're not," but Horwitz sees no sign Meta won't still be prominent in 10 years. Even when it hasn't invented the next thing, it has been extremely good at buying or imitating it.
Meta's response (read by the BBC)
On the chatbot allegations, Meta said the examples and notes "were and are erroneous and inconsistent with our policies and have been removed," and that it has clear policies prohibiting content that sexualises children and sexualised roleplay between adults and minors.
Prompt issued to LLM3:
Generate a list of Agerico De Villa Bridge360 Metatheory Model-related Substack post in the last 200 days that involves the value of human inputs into current physical informational and social space plus the actual human values that seemingly are surviving given current information space chaos.
LLM3 response:
Bridge360 Substack posts (last 200 days) on human inputs and surviving human values
Window covered: roughly March 15 to September 30, 2026, across 246 posts in the archive. The posts below are the ones whose substance matches both halves of your brief: the value of human contributions to physical/informational/social space, and the human values that appear to persist under information-space chaos. Grouped by sub-theme, newest first within each group.
Core: scarcity value of human artifacts and judgment
When readers may increasingly seek human artifacts offering both compression progress and navigational provenance (Aug 10) — argues that works "preserving distinctive human navigational trajectories through memory, imagination, uncertainty, affect and social constraint may acquire increasing informational and cultural scarcity value." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
The Provenance Paradox: Why AI Abundance Makes Human Fiction Scarce (Aug 10) — value shifts "from the text-as-commodity to its navigational provenance"; readers seek "a distinctive, verified human path through the maze of memory, affect, and constraint." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Epistemic Inbreeding and LLMs (Jul 16) — lists the human/empirical inputs that keep recursion healthy (field observation, bodily experience, lab work, social conflict, local practice, unanticipated failure) and warns the pathology begins when recursion "is no longer adequately refreshed by… independent human judgment." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Entropy-Driven Altruism (EDA): Humanities and arts, not obsolete (Jun 11) — humanities "become more important because societies need humans who can judge meaning, provenance, legitimacy, manipulation, cultural value, and social consequence." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
LLMs, humans, earthworms, equally cocooned (Jun 1) — LLMs depend on "human prompts, training pipelines, infrastructure, electricity, data curation, evaluation, and deployment contexts." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Navigating information chaos: which human capacities survive
Building chaos navigators for LLM sophistry (Aug 25) — humans must evaluate incentives, manage uncertainty, and preserve optionality rather than rely on AI labels: "Educate people who can navigate when the labels fail." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
The Sophistry of Machines: AI and the Search for Truth (Aug 25) — companion piece positioning human scientists and engineers as necessary contributors to the model. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Maps vs. Bubbles: Navigating the Epistemic Collapse of Generative AI (Aug 20) — mutual aid as "a survival mechanism" in a post-truth era, plus a dialogical method for maintaining coherence. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
LLM watermarking and Philosophy of Education (Aug 19) — provenance labels are auxiliary governance tools; the surviving asset is the human mental model that works when labels fail. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Where traditional "truth-seeking" faces systemic limits (Sep 22) — human agency as "the capacity to monitor and revise one's own inferential trajectories," with physical, informational, and social systems sharing "one entropy geometry." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Navigating Post-Trust World with Entropy Attractor Intelligence Paradigm (Mar 30) and its follow-up Claude Opus 4.6 and Grok 4.2 lenses applied (Mar 31) — "In the absence of Trust (Truth), we shall govern via Convergence (Stability)," with altruism, cooperation, and provenance as the persisting mechanisms. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Surviving values reframed thermodynamically: altruism, trust, creativity
What developmental architecture makes the human side of that governance loop capable of governing? (Sep 26) — cooperation "as a thermodynamic necessity rather than a moral choice." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Default and executive brain neural networks: Entropy Governance and the Architecture of Creativity (Aug 5) — creativity as a governed process surviving under constraints of viability, leakage, optionality, and reversibility. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Entropy-Driven Altruism as the new Socialism (Jul 4; audio Jul 4, video Jul 5) — "Altruism is redefined as the operational form of entropy management required to keep complex systems from reaching critical fragility thresholds." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Definition of trust in entropic terms (Jun 26) — "Trust is the governance decision to permit reliance on that system," a human judgment that stays meaningful under informational entropy. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Clarifying the meaning of Entropy-Driven Altruism (May 30) — "altruism becomes corridor-stabilizing entropy management." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Revisiting Ken Robinson's "Out of Our Minds" (May 13) — creativity and imagination as human capacities that hold value through technological and cultural upheaval. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
In Search for Validation and Meaning (May 2) — disciplined human–LLM dialogue as "an instrument-tuning process" alert to slop, sycophancy, and "mathematical lipstick." (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Humanity as data source for ASI
Leakage problem at civilizational scale (Apr 2) — "Humanity as a Data Source" whose high-entropy "primordial soup" seeds ASI, with EDA embedded "into the culture and the code" to couple ASI utility with reducing human suffering. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
Borderline (adjacent, weaker fit)
The Curricular Spine: Bridge360 Philosophy of Education (Jun 25) — education as building "a resilient human processing system," but without naming which values persist. (agericomontecillodevilla link)
If you'd like, I can turn this into a Markdown file with one-paragraph abstracts per post, or widen the screen to the EDA/capitalism posts (Jul 13, Jul 25) that touch the same themes from an economic angle.
Prompt issued to LLM3:
Any of these list of the highlights of this BBC "Is Meta dying? | The Global Story podcast" YouTube episode resonating with Bridge360 Metatheory Model norms? Reminder. Bridge360 Metatheory Model “is a work in philosophy of science, not science per se. It presupposes a Revolutionary Science space where the linguistic space does not contain “true,” “false,” and “truth,” with “reality” as either trivial or meaningless, to use Alfred Tarski’s disquotation theory cues, where the boundary between space and cyberspace, to use Norbert Wiener’s parlance, is also treated as trivial or meaningless thanks to Claude Shannon’s formulation of entropy in the way the boundary between physics and chemistry is treated also as meaningless thanks to the formulation by Ludwig Boltzmann of entropy. In the spirit of Kurt Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem, Alan Turing’s Halting Problem, and Alonso Church’s Undecidability of First Order Logic Thesis plus never ending demands of entropy, this model has no metaphysical or ontological claims nor claims to completeness expecting scientists themselves to contribute, among other contributors. Physical, informational, and social systems live in one entropy geometry; any boundaries we draw (physics vs chemistry, offline vs online) are memetic/governance conveniences, not ontological walls.” Ergo, the Handshake Protocol within the metatheory model; handshake is the invite to scientists and engineers. Note that Bridge360 Metatheory Model does not discount the heuristic value of truth-seeking, only that the metateheory model moves onto a higher level of emergence, to use parlance of Robert Laughlin, upon reaching the limits of truth-seeking.
Backgrounder here.
LLM3 response:
Where the Meta episode resonates with Bridge360 norms
Caveat discipline first: this is a mapping of a journalist's account onto a philosophy-of-science grammar, not an empirical claim about Meta. The resonances are strong in places, and Horwitz's own framing in a few spots actually runs against the model; both are noted.
Strong resonances
1. Growth vs. integrity as the Volatility Paradox, not a moral failure.Horwitz's central finding, that optimising for growth, engagement, and ad revenue "frequently ran directly contrary" to civil discourse, and that integrity teams were "boxed in" because every fix took the platform "off the growth-optimal path", is almost a textbook case of what the Generalized Governance Algorithm v20.6 names the Volatility Paradox: local optimization producing global fragility. The model would decline to frame this as Meta "choosing evil"; it would frame it as a system whose admissibility filter (Axiom 19) was never installed, so entropy budgets and fragility caps were never binding on the growth loop. The episode's language of "when push comes to shove, consistently chosen growth" is the signature of an ungoverned attractor, not a character flaw.[zenodo]
2. The pro-virality system as entropic blowout.Horwitz describes a "pro-virality, pro-acceleration" system in which content "breaches containment" before anyone can check it, and engagement loops serve more of the same whether cat videos, unhealthy weight-loss content, or vitriolic politics. This maps directly onto the Axiom 19 enforcement targets in ASI Engagement: entropy budgets, fragility caps, and selective friction to prevent entropy blow-outs. The notable point is that the episode itself never uses "true" or "false" as the diagnostic; it uses speed, containment, and amplification, which is already the model's vocabulary rather than truth-correspondence vocabulary.[zenodo]
3. "People thought the worst of Meta, but usage didn't decline" as evidence for truth-neutrality.This is the deepest resonance. The internal marketing memo showing public contempt coexisting with undiminished use, plus Horwitz's observation that predictions of "fake news and crappy generative AI videos" tanking the numbers "has never been the case", is precisely the regime the model says truth-seeking cannot explain. Reputational truth about the company had no operational traction on the system's trajectory. The Philosophical Foundations Note holds that in a post-correspondence space the operative criteria are coherence, survivability, and entropic governance, and Meta's survival through contempt is consistent with that. In Laughlin's terms, this is where truth-seeking reached its limit and a higher emergent level (attractor stability) became the relevant descriptor.[zenodo]
4. The Facebook Files as a Handshake artifact.Horwitz's method, "tens of thousands of blurry screenshots taken with personal phones of internal work product," is a bounded observer filling a K-budget with domain estimators, which is how the v20.5 Epiplexity Handshake describes the metatheory keeping structural slots open while domain contributors supply observables. Béjar's large-scale teen survey is the cleaner instance: a safety engineer translating lived harm into measurable observables and thresholds. These are the human inputs the model treats as irreplaceable, in the same register as the "Epistemic Inbreeding" essay's insistence that recursion be refreshed by field observation and independent human judgment.[zenodo]
5. The $17B settlement terms as corridor engineering, with a leakage problem.No notifications at night or during the school day, a two-hour daily cap for known teens: these are selective friction and entropy-bounded corridors by another name. Horwitz's caveat, "theoretically, because Meta has to correctly determine that an account is a teenager," is a leakage statement in the model's sense. The corridor is only as good as its boundary detection, and the Australian experience (most banned 13-to-15-year-olds still using the platforms) is leakage at national scale.
6. "Parental controls: everyone liked them, almost nobody used them" as the labels-fail problem.This is the same lesson as the "Building chaos navigators" and "LLM watermarking" posts: do not design an information society that is navigable only when everything is correctly labelled and gated. Parental controls are a label-and-gate solution; the model's response is developmental, build humans who can navigate when the gates fail.
7. Offline/online boundary treated as trivial.The episode moves without friction between Béjar's daughter's lived harassment, teen mental-health statistics, state attorneys general, school-district lawsuits, and feed-ranking code. Nobody in the conversation treats cyberspace harms as ontologically different from physical ones. That is the Wiener/Shannon boundary dissolution your reminder specifies, enacted implicitly by a mainstream broadcaster.
8. Chatbots and the "romantic or sensual" policy document as the same attractor on a new substrate.Horwitz explicitly says Meta's generative-AI approach was "very similar in terms of we must make the thing grow even if there are some really unpleasant side effects." The model's substrate-agnostic claim predicts exactly this: an ungoverned growth attractor will reproduce its geometry whether the substrate is a news feed or an LLM. The disputed policy document is also an Action-Guidance layer failure in v20.5 terms, exploratory permissiveness leaking into an artifact that guided deployment.
9. Called-off 60% layoffs as a fragility threshold being respected.Zuckerberg abandoning steep AI-driven layoffs because "the AI wasn't there yet" and staff were "almost mutinous" is an instance of a system backing away from a critical fragility threshold, which Entropy-Driven Altruism describes as the condition near which cooperation becomes thermodynamically necessary rather than optional. Retaining the humans was not benevolence; it was survival.[zenodo]
10. "Behemoths until they're not" and buy-or-imitate survival.Horwitz's closing judgment, that Meta has survived multiple technology cycles not by inventing the next thing but by buying or imitating it, is Recursive Pareto Propagation plus attractor persistence: concentration of throughput maintains the basin even when the originating mechanism changes. His "nothing's ever secure" is the model's refusal of completeness claims.
Where the episode runs against the model
Horwitz's framing is still moralist in places. "Benefit itself at the expense of democracy," "making choices that seemed to benefit itself," and the Meta-is-not-infallible line are truth-and-blame vocabulary. The model would retain these as heuristically valuable (your reminder's point that truth-seeking is not discounted) but would say they have already shown they do not move the system, so the next move is governance geometry, not more exposure.
The episode has no concept of reversibility or rollback. It discusses what Meta did and settled, not whether any of the growth-loop decisions were ever auditable or reversible. In v20.5 terms, the Stability-under-Change layer (dossiers, tripwires, audit logs, rollback semantics) is entirely absent from the account, which is itself diagnostic.
"Is Meta dying?" is the wrong question in the model's grammar. Death/survival of a firm is a truth-bivalent question. The model's question is whether the corridor Meta occupies is entropy-bounded and whether its leakage is being metered by anyone with the standing to install friction.
Net reading
The episode resonates most strongly on the truth-neutrality finding (contempt without churn), the Volatility Paradox (growth optimisation producing systemic fragility), and the Handshake role of whistleblowers and safety engineers as suppliers of observables. The human values that survive in the account are provenance (Horwitz's screenshots, Béjar's survey), care expressed as fragility avoidance (the layoffs that didn't happen, the parent who came back as a consultant), and cooperation as a thermodynamic constraint rather than a sentiment. Those are the same three the recent Substack posts kept returning to.
Prompt issued to LLM as Bridge360 Metatheory Model 20.5 and v20.6 marked-down files are uploaded:
These matter in addressing issues raised in this conversation?
LLM3 response:
Yes. Both documents sharpen the earlier mapping considerably, and in a few places they correct it. The main gain is that they turn loose analogies ("this looks like leakage") into named gates with declared failure conditions. Here is what changes.
What the two documents add to the Meta analysis
1. The Volatility Paradox now has a precise signature, and Meta fits it exactly.§G29 defines the paradox as Var(NEE(S_i)) ↓ while F(M) ↑: a subsystem stabilises itself by externalising entropy onto neighbours. Horwitz's account is precisely this: the growth/ads loop stabilised Meta's own metrics (contempt without churn, steady revenue) while fragility accumulated in teens, fragile democracies, and now in a litigation stack of school districts and private plaintiffs. §G29's "pre-priced repair path" is the EDA constraint "requiring the locally-stabilizing agent to internalize externalized entropy cost", which is a truth-neutral description of what the $17B settlement does. The settlement is not justice in the model's grammar; it is forced internalisation.
2. §G14 reclassifies Meta's "stability" as Potemkin.§G14 flags resource flows "that reduce one agent's entropy at the cost of unbounded increase in another's" as non-altruistic extraction and "Potemkin stability (the system looks stable locally but is fragile globally)". That gives a sharper name to the marketing memo finding than I offered earlier. Also relevant: EDA condition 3, "no covert altruism — covert resource transfers are ungoverned interventions." Meta's integrity teams were a covert, undeclared counterflow inside an extraction system, which is why they were absorbable.
3. Feed ranking is a Hard Tripwire §4.8 violation, not just a design choice.v20.5 §4.8 (Ungoverned curation): changing input data "selection, generation, ordering, augmentation" without declaring the intervention and its expected effect "is a governed operation, not a neutral preprocessing step." The 2012-era move from chronological to engagement-ranked feeds, as Horwitz describes it, is this tripwire fired at planetary scale, with no §8 intervention declaration ever shipped. Likewise, rolling the chatbots out to children without a declared expected effect is the same tripwire on a new substrate.
4. Virality is RIM sophistry by definition.§G17.2 defines sophistry as inferential rules that are "memetically fit (they spread, they persuade, they reward adopters socially) but entropy-unbounded." Horwitz's "pro-virality, pro-acceleration" system is an engine for selecting rules on exactly the wrong axis. §G17.1 is also where the earlier Substack posts on chaos navigators and LLM sophistry plug in: the governance target is the selection environment ("algorithmic amplification, social reward structures"), not individual posts.
5. §G30 explains why governance failed inside Meta.The Pareto gate's third condition: "governance capacity is not itself Pareto-concentrated — governance must be more evenly distributed than the throughput it monitors." Zuckerberg's voting control, plus his stated regret at having taken criticism seriously, is the inverse: governance more concentrated than throughput. §G24's BID dual-key structure (neither party can unilaterally alter the corridor) is the design Meta lacks; "Human override without attestation… governance degrades to monological control" (§G24.3) describes it.
6. The metaverse and the AI pivot are ungoverned TBWs.v20.5 §9 permits controlled instability only with a specified trap, declared budget, explicit tripwires, a rollback plan Ω, and immutable logging. The near-$80B metaverse bet had a rollback (it was axed) but no pre-declared Ω or tripwire thresholds, so the exit was a reaction, not a governed closure. The AI pivot is a second TBW opened before the first was closed. The abandoned 60% layoff plan reads as a tripwire that happened to fire (staff "almost mutinous") rather than one that was declared.
7. "Behemoths until they're not" gets a dynamical vocabulary.§G31: "Perturbations near the basin boundary are governance risks even if NEE remains in-band — the system is one shock away from regime change." Horwitz's closing judgment is this sentence in plain English: no indication of decline, but no governance of basin position either.
8. "Is Meta dying?" fails the §G33 meta-layer.The question is bivalent and undeclared: no auxiliary assumptions (which Meta: the ad business, the user base, the brand?), no paradigm declared, no proxy function. The model's reframing, which I only gestured at before, is now specific: declare R, declare the spine, declare the observer, then ask about corridor position and leakage.
What the documents add to the Substack list
The v20.5 Path/Provenance Signature (§6) is the operational form of the provenance-paradox essays: "navigational provenance" in the August 10 posts is a PPS for literature, with T2 Hub capture ("most paths route through dominant hubs") naming why AI-generated abundance collapses provenance. The chaos-navigator and watermarking posts are RIM §G17 at the education layer. The EDA posts are §G13–§G15 verbatim. And the BID (§G24) is the formal structure the "developmental architecture of the human side of the governance loop" post (Sep 26) is asking about.
Two caveats the documents themselves impose
Band C only. v20.5 §3 requires a K-budget "instantiated with computable estimators for the declared domain" before anything reaches Band A, and Appendix A.6 lists "K-budget for social systems" as an open slot. So no NEE for Meta can actually be computed today; everything above is exploratory commentary, and §5 would label it "Commentary Mode (non-certified)." Claiming otherwise would trip §4.3 (Unscoped K-claims).
The Handshake is the live question. Horwitz and Béjar are supplying observables (screenshots, surveys, settlement terms), but no one has yet proposed the estimator that turns them into F(M) or NEE. That is the slot a political scientist, institutional economist, or platform-data researcher would need to fill, which is exactly where your reminder places the invitation.
Use this URL to view the entire conversation with Claude Fable 5.1 that covers generation of a Bridge360 Metatheory Model native glossary for those here unfamiliar with this metatheory model.
Comments