Ben draft 3.1: closing paragraph = split-vs-merge strategic ask (our lean: two papers, capstone at 'the broadest venue the result can carry' — Nature unspoken)

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/EMAIL_BEN_DRAFT2.md b/EMAIL_BEN_DRAFT2.md
index 1839a8a..9558ec2 100644
--- a/EMAIL_BEN_DRAFT2.md
+++ b/EMAIL_BEN_DRAFT2.md
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ Separately — and this may interest Rain directly — **we are planning a small
 
 Two small accounting questions: is the ~$20k a per-run cap inside a larger envelope, or the envelope itself? And does the backprop-twin control (≈1/3 the EP cost, needed for the head-to-head claim) draw from the same pool?
 
-No rush on the draft — it has since been restructured; I'd send the updated PDF before you invest reading time.
+On the draft — it has since been restructured, so I'd send you the updated PDF before you invest reading time. And as you read, one strategic question we would genuinely value your judgment on. The dynamics story in your hands and the scaling demonstration above are separable: the report stands on its own, and only a slice of it is load-bearing for the LM line. We currently lean toward two papers — the dynamics and its control map now, and the scale demonstration later as a capstone aimed at **the broadest venue the result can carry**, with the dynamics paper as its mechanistic backbone. Merged into one, though, it is a different kind of artifact. You have better instincts than we do about which package travels further.
 
 Best,
 Yuren