# Report

Status: DONE

## Result

The independent copy audit is complete. The 116 message versions and 14 expert samples are mostly honest about prototype state, distinguish service mail from opt-in marketing, and preserve the proposed daily service, separate initial spontaneous video, final 2–3 minute clip, and post-challenge consultation. Content acceptance still needs copy/source-alignment fixes: the clearest defects are Day 1 and Day 6 feedback clips that do not match the assigned recordings, the omitted required Day 8 recording in the email prompt, repeated Hungarian template errors, and an unresolved practice-time interpretation.

DONE means the audit and evidence are complete. It does not mean the copy is accepted for deployment or sending.

## Deliverables and checks

| Deliverable | Requirement or verification | Result | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| All 58 topics / 116 versions | Read each complete subject, preheader, body and CTA; compare A/B | PASS, audit complete | [email-inventory.md](/Users/agency/Documents/Agty/KomplexLogopédia/outputs/rita-journey-20261002/evidence/journey-content-audit/email-inventory.md) lists each exact variant, per-topic trigger/recipient/type/destination/exclusion, and verdict. 65 versions pass as written; 51 need wording or source-alignment revisions. All 58 A/B pairs have distinct full bodies and distinct frames. |
| Trigger, recipient, exclusion and destination | Match copy to preview metadata and flow routing | PASS | `flow.js` renders the full metadata beside the email, including message type and exclusions. All 58 CTA destinations resolve from the flow page, and the daily-feedback anchor resolves to `feedback-current`. |
| Service versus opt-in marketing | Check service receipts/reminders/feedback, consent-based nurture, paid suppression and cohort-promotion replacement | PASS | Marketing entries are explicitly typed and consent-gated in the metadata; paid participants are excluded from cohort sales; promotion excludes the weekly letter during an active cohort. The flow preview states no email is sent. |
| Source and proposal claims | Check six original modules, daily split, time, separate initial clip, daily-feedback proposal, and final consultation against the matrix and map | NEEDS CLARIFICATION | Details and exact fixes are below. Price, 12-person cohort, dates, teaching recordings and timing remain labelled proposals/unconfirmed. Daily feedback is not presented as Rita’s approval. |
| Fourteen expert samples | Check observation, support, next focus, day/source specificity, fiction, fixture, diagnoses and individual-result claims | NEEDS COPY FIXES | All 14 samples contain a day-relevant observation, source-linked explanation and next focus. They are explicitly fictional and do not assess the technical test clip or diagnose. Day 1, Day 6 and Day 8 clip alignment needs correction. |
| Hungarian and requested punctuation | Scan all email fields for placeholders, em dashes and semicolons; review repeated templates | NEEDS COPY FIXES | No unresolved placeholder patterns, em dashes or semicolons found in the new email copy. Repeated article/title constructions and one self-referential subject require edits. |
| Rita’s unsent email and proposed review order | Compare against the current proposal and unconfirmed items | PASS | [rita-unsent-email.md](/Users/agency/Documents/Agty/KomplexLogopédia/outputs/rita-journey-20261002/site/review/rita-unsent-email.md) is explicitly unsent, accurately says daily feedback is Matt’s proposal, lists unconfirmed terms, discloses the local prototype, and gives a useful order: offer pages, one complete participant/expert day, then service capacity and missing launch materials. |

## Defects that affect acceptance

The Day 1 daily recording asks for counting and months, while both fictional feedback variants comment on an SZ ending. The initial spontaneous clip is separately selectable, and the daily task does not ask for SZ/S. Change the sample to an observable in the requested counting/months clip, or explicitly include an SZ/S recording in that day’s task.

The Day 6 recording asks for M/V counting, but both feedback variants assess pitch during the “manna-menne-monno-mánná” target-delivery exercise. Change the sample observation and next focus to the M/V count, or add the target-delivery phrase to the recording instruction.

The original Day 8 source asks the participant to record both the Kínai templom columns and the complete “Ha a világ rigó lenne” poem. The email says to record “the whole poem” and describes the Kínai templom reading as something the participant may rewatch. The expert sample then comments on Kínai templom. Make the required recording explicit in both the daily message and feedback context so the sample corresponds to the uploaded clip.

The B version of all 14 daily expert emails opens with the construction “A [feladatcím] feladathoz kapcsolódó visszajelzés…”. It is ungrammatical or awkward, especially for imperative task titles such as “A ismerkedj…” and “A juttasd…”. Use a consistent construction such as `A „[feladatcím]” című feladathoz kapcsolódó visszajelzés…`.

All 14 B reminder messages say “majd nézd meg a saját napi válasz helyét.” The trigger allows a reminder before Rita has finished a response, so this can imply an answer is already available. Change it to say the answer will appear there after Rita completes it. Day 1 and Day 5 B reminders also need `Az 1. naphoz` and `Az 5. naphoz` rather than `A 1./5. naphoz`.

Other repeated Hungarian fixes are exact and bounded:

- Day 1 email A: `Ma a 1. témakörrel` → `Ma az 1. témakörrel`.
- Day 1 B: `A 1. nap` → `Az 1. nap`; `a A légzés modul` duplicates the article.
- Day 2 B: `a A légzés modul` duplicates the article.
- Day 5 B: `A 5. nap` → `Az 5. nap`.
- Day 7 and 8 B: `a A beszéd és a ritmus modul` duplicates the article.
- Day 10 email A: `a 5. témakörrel` → `az 5. témakörrel`.
- Daily feedback email intros for Days 1 and 5: `Ez a 1./5. napi` → `Ez az 1./5. napi`. Day 5 B subject also needs `Az 5. napi videó…`.
- The four module-6 day messages use `Integráció, mindent összerakunk`, while [source-promise-map.json](/Users/agency/Documents/Agty/KomplexLogopédia/outputs/rita-journey-20261002/evidence/landing/source-promise-map.json) selects `Integráció: mindent összerakunk`. The B versions also say `a Integráció… modul`. Align the four day titles with the selected colon form and use a grammatical article/title construction.
- Weekly email B subject `Egy megfigyelési szempont: hasznos heti levél` names the email format, not the movement topic. Use a topic-specific subject such as `Beszéd és mozgás: figyeld a tempót`.
- Promo-open A and B both say `személyes Rita-visszajelzést kapsz`, which reads unnaturally. Use `Ritától személyes visszajelzést kapsz`.

## Source interpretation to settle

The six source modules carry the original time guidance: modules 1–5 are about 20 minutes and module 6 about 30 minutes. The daily model repeats those values for each day paired to a source module, so the 14 daily entries and messages add up to 320 minutes. The six original module values add up to 130 minutes. The free/challenge offer email correctly warns that videos and reflections add time, but it does not state the full daily workload. Decide whether the daily split intentionally adds a full 20- or 30-minute practice every day. If yes, label this as the new pilot’s per-day estimate, not as the source’s duration. If the daily lessons divide the original module workload, allocate the source minutes across each module’s paired days and update their emails.

The source meaning itself is otherwise preserved: the initial spontaneous clip remains separate, the final agreed-practice recording remains one clip of at most 2–3 minutes, the original reflection scale remains 1–5 with its open question, and the consultation can be reserved early but happens after the two-week challenge. The source’s every-other-morning cadence and the new daily proposal are clearly distinguished.

## Limits or consequential decisions

This was a read-only content audit outside the assigned report/evidence paths. No browser was used, no email or external message was sent, and no product, publishing, backend or security changes were made. The `emails.html` preview logic only displays sample copy and its context; the observed flow code does not send email. The review URL text was checked for consistency with the supplied proposal, but its live rendering was not part of this content-only audit.