Som · Monday 2 November 2026 · for Vin and Bobby · no export · no result
This note checks two story ideas. It does not choose one. It does not allow a Wikipedia edit. It does not allow a pitch. It does not allow a data pull. W6-5 is due Tuesday 4 November. It is not done. Each angle still needs a real user count and a privacy floor. No step was ticked on the board seo-2026-10-02.
Hypertune is a Windows app from COMPREADY Inc. It tunes a gaming PC. A later public report may use scan totals. That report is meant to stay neutral enough for a Wikipedia article someday.
Wikipedia is a public encyclopedia. Bobby is the only Wikipedia editor on this work. This note does not ask him to edit.
A company report is not a Wikipedia citation. Staff have a conflict of interest. People on this project work with Hypertune. A report we write is our own report. It is not an outside source.
The only founder named here is Austin Copeland. The facts page says: "Hypertune is made by COMPREADY Inc., a US company Austin Copeland founded in 2022."
I used only what is already written on these three pages. I did not add a count.
Bobby's list is "Hypertune PR Angles: Top 5" (31 Oct), as named on the W6-2 page.
A scan is only confirmed to read CPU, GPU, memory, and storage. These are not confirmed as saved fields: memory profile, power plan, bloatware, manufacturer, model, install date, and a no-change flag.
Memory profile means a faster memory setting, on or off. It is not the same as "how much memory the PC has." Power plan is a Windows setting for how the PC uses power. Bloatware means extra programs that ship on a PC. Manufacturer is who made the PC. Model is which PC it is. Install date is when the system was set up. A no-change flag would mark a PC that needed nothing.
The product has Memory Optimizations and Windows Debloating. The W6-2 note says that "is not the same as a saved yes/no on each scan." The facts page lists the features in this order: CPU Overclocking, GPU Overclocking, Windows Debloating, Network Optimizations, Memory Optimizations and Game Hub.
W6-4 was ticked on 2 November. It only records this. User terms allow an anonymised aggregate report. Som is to have data access. More data is being pulled so later claims can cover performance in games and in individual games based on hardware. The field list was not handed over. The login was not handed over. Som does not have the export.
The public FPS line stays "Users see up to 60% higher FPS." A mean figure stays off this note. Do not use Hypertune's own FPS gains as the story hook. The method template says: "The news story does not use Hypertune's own FPS gains as the hook."
A zero stays in. A negative stays in. They are not dropped to raise an average. One row is one PC, not one account. Staff, test accounts, and incomplete scans are out. The method template says how to do that. The dates and the extra exclusions are still blank.
Until Austin writes the floor, no cell is published. If a cell is too small, the report says "not shown", not a rounded guess. The template also says a cell under the floor is omitted. It is not described as "fewer than N" if that still points at a person or a single brand.
Vin, 1 November, has not chosen this. His line for the shortlist is: the PC settings most gamers get wrong, ranked by how often, with a separate Rust cut. Include the share of PCs that needed nothing. Never rank by FPS gain.
Bobby's heading on the W6-2 page is "The PC settings most gamers get wrong, ranked". His ask, as written there:
rank problems by how often they appear in scans, not by FPS gain. Include the share of PCs that needed nothing. A Rust cut is separate. Publish anonymised totals only.
This story would tell a reader which PC settings show up as wrong most often. The rank is by how many PCs have the setting. It is not by how much FPS Hypertune adds. It would also say what share of PCs needed no change. Rust is a game. A Rust cut is the same ranking, counted again for that game only. It stays separate. It is not added to the main count.
The story is for a future public report. That report might later support a neutral Wikipedia article. This check does not say the story is true. It does not make the report. It does not edit Wikipedia.
| Field | What it is for | Confirmed? |
|---|---|---|
| A stored field on each scan for each setting to rank. Named so far: memory profile, power plan, bloatware, and any other "wrong default". | These are the rows you would count. Without them there is nothing to rank. | Not confirmed. The app can offer Memory Optimizations and Windows Debloating. That is not a saved yes or no on each scan. |
| A row for every scanned PC, including PCs with no change. Plus a no-change flag. | This is how you get the share of PCs that needed nothing. PCs with no change have to stay in the set. | Not confirmed. |
| A stored game, or a separate Rust test. The W6-2 note says: "Game Hub can target a game. A scan field named Rust is not confirmed." | This is the separate Rust cut. Game Hub changes in-game settings through each game's config files. The facts page says that is all it changes. That is not a saved Rust column on the scan. | Not confirmed. |
| CPU, GPU, memory, and storage. | These are the only read fields the scan is confirmed to have. They do not answer "which setting was wrong." | Confirmed as read. They are not the ranking fields. |
The W6-2 gaps line, as written: "No field list, no sample size, no privacy floor yet (see W7-1). Without those, this angle is not ready to pull."
The user count is the number of PCs in the scan set. It is the bottom number of every share. Status: not in hand. It is not on the facts page. The W6-2 note says to wait until Kevin gives a count under the privacy floor in the method template. I am not writing a count.
Austin sets the floor. It is the smallest group we will show. The method template still says: Floor: ____ PCs, set by Austin on ____. Status: blank. I am not filling it. A public cell under the floor is "not shown".
Build hours are the time to make this report after the fields, the count, and the floor are in hand. No hour figure is written on the three pages. Status: not in hand. I am not guessing a number.
Vin, 1 November, has not chosen this. His line for the shortlist is: new prebuilt PCs ship with slow defaults, from scan data only. Five borrowed PCs are a new study, not archive data.
A prebuilt PC is one sold already built. "Slow defaults" is the story claim about the settings it ships with. This note does not say that claim is true.
Bobby's heading on the W6-2 page is "Bought a new gaming PC? It's probably not set up right". His note says the ask has two parts. The scan part is existing data. The five borrowed PCs are a new test, not data we already hold. His words for that test, as written: "Five borrowed new PCs, out-of-box, then free fixes, then Hypertune, tested in Rust". Status there: "Not held. That is a study still to recruit. It is not in the scan archive."
This check uses the scan-data story only. The five PCs stay a new study. They are not archive rows. The number five is the size of a study nobody has run. It is not a user count.
This story would look at whether new ready-made PCs leave the shop with slow default settings. The evidence for this version would be scan totals only. It is for the same future public report as angle A. That report might later support a neutral Wikipedia article. This check does not write the report. It does not edit Wikipedia.
The five borrowed PCs would be a different study. Someone would still have to recruit them. They are not a reason to treat this angle as ready.
| Field | What it is for | Confirmed? |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer and model. | These would say who made the PC and which model it is. Bobby says Windows reports them. The W6-2 note says that does not mean the Hypertune export keeps them. | Not confirmed. |
| Install date. | This is how "new" would be defined. The rule has to be written first. The W6-2 note says "new" needs a rule (install date inside a window) in the method before any cut. | Not confirmed. The group size for "new" PCs versus all scans is not held. |
| Memory profile on or off, and bloatware present. | These are the settings the story would call slow defaults. Same gap as angle A. | Not confirmed. |
| Five borrowed new PCs. | This would be a fresh test: out of the box, then free fixes, then Hypertune, in Rust. It is not this scan story. | Not held. Not archive data. Still to recruit. |
The W6-2 gaps line, as written: "Do not rank brands from scans until the field list and the group sizes are confirmed. Report by setting, not by brand, until the groups clear the privacy floor."
This angle needs two counts. One is all scanned PCs. One is the "new" PCs, after a written date rule. Status: not in hand. Both are missing. I am not writing a round marketing count. The five borrowed PCs are not this count.
Same floor as angle A. Austin has not set it. Status: blank. Brand ranks are especially sensitive. A small brand cell can point at one maker. Until the groups clear the floor, the W6-2 note says to report by setting, not by brand. A public cell under the floor is "not shown".
Same meaning as angle A. The hours to build the scan report are not written. The hours to recruit and test five PCs are not written either. Status: not in hand. I am not guessing a number.
Angles 2 and 4 both wait on one answer: which of these names exist as columns on a scan export. Memory profile, power plan, bloatware, manufacturer, model, install date, and a flag for "no change". Until that list comes back, neither angle should be pitched as ready.
W6-4 did not bring that list. The login did not arrive. Som does not have the export. Neither angle is ready to pull. Neither angle is ready to pitch.
W7-2 is the step that sends the finished method to Travis. It is due Friday 6 November. The method template exists. It is the W7-1 page linked above. The angle is not chosen. Bobby and Vin only shortlist on 3 November. The template says to fill the blanks after the angle is chosen (W6-6). So the finished method cannot be sent to Travis yet. W7-2 is not done.
These blanks are still open. This note does not fill them.
| Blank | What it is for | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Angle | Which story the sample, the dates, and the extra exclusions belong to. The template marks these spots [angle]. | Open. Not chosen. |
| Dates | One window in UTC. A start datetime and an end datetime. Both dates would sit next to every figure. The template says: Start: ____. End: ____. | Open. Left blank. |
| Privacy floor | The smallest group Austin will show. The template says: Floor: ____ PCs, set by Austin on ____. | Open. Left blank. |
| PC key | The rule that says two scans are the same computer. The template says repeat scans of the same PC collapse to one row: the latest complete scan in the window. It does not name the field that marks the PC. | Open. Left blank. |
| Required fields | The fields that must be present. The template says an incomplete scan is recognised by a required field missing. It says to name that before the pull. It does not name the fields. | Open. Left blank. |
The template also says it does not name the angle, the dates, or the privacy floor. Field names for a scan export were waiting on W6-4. W6-4 did not hand them over. Nothing in the template is a result. Nothing on this page is a result.
W6-5 stays open. It closes only when each angle has a real user count and a privacy floor. Today both are missing on both angles. The fields those angles need are still not confirmed. This page does not tick W6-5. It does not tick W7-2. It does not post to the board seo-2026-10-02.