Goal: audit Source G2's quantifier, selection and possible bias. 25 = 2 + 5 + 7 + 7 + 4.
- 0–2: Read “every”, “guarantees”, “without exception” aloud; identify what a strong claim would require.
- 2–7: Contrast x=1 values 5/6 with x=2 values 8/9: equal x can have different y. More decisively, proposed line predicts 17 at x=5 but I lists 22. A selected A/C/E/G sequence supports the exact rule only for those four drafts, not all nine.
- 7–14: Learners compare the four selected drafts with the full notebook and plan a fairer next dataset: define draft source, inclusion rule, units and gameplay question separately. No real participants are recruited.
- 14–21: Routes: highlight selected/unselected cards; arrange nine tactile cards into retained/omitted piles; write a short source-claim-limit audit. Each must name at least one omitted conflicting record and a sampling limit.
- 21–25: Exit “What is the denominator of maps in the source and in the cherry-picked set?” Look-for: nine versus four. Next move: if learner calls four random, ask for an actual selection procedure.
Another setting: Fictional rehearsal diagrams selectively showing cue density. Optional/home: invent a five-item dataset and write a headline that tells its scope.