docs/history/DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md

@@ -46,66 +46,6 @@ sequence would have implied more.
 
 ## Entries
 
-### 2026-08-18 — Batch 11 closed without a line of code, and a browser found what twenty issues had not
-
-Batch 11's four issues were all viewport claims. **All four were false**, and
-this time they were disproved by rendering the site rather than by reading it.
-
-| # | claim | measured |
-| --- | --- | --- |
-| 195 | dropdowns clip on constrained viewports | **no clipping ancestor exists** — walked every ancestor, all `overflow: visible`. At 768px the Industries dropdown ends 95px clear of the edge |
-| 196 | logo overlaps nav at 320px | text ends x=252, burger starts x=264 — a **12px gap**. No truncation, no horizontal scroll |
-| 197 | no image fallbacks, users see broken placeholders | every image 200, **zero broken** after a full scroll, CLS 0.008 against a 0.1 threshold, LCP 220ms |
-| 198 | click handler misses nested children | `e.target.closest('a')` **already is** delegation; the listener is on `document` |
-
-#196 also conflated two unrelated elements — `w-[85vw] max-w-[300px]` is the
-mobile Sheet panel, not the header.
-
-**Running total across Batches 10 and 11: three of ten were real.** Seven
-misstated their own evidence, and two of those would have made the site worse
-if actioned.
-
-**So I built the thing that should have existed first.** `scripts/qa-browser.mjs`
-drives real Chromium at real viewports and measures horizontal scroll, broken
-images, elements past the right edge, CLS and LCP.
-
-**On its first production run it found two defects none of the twenty had
-noticed**, and both were real:
-
-- **#214 (P1)** — at exactly 768px, iPad portrait, the header's *Request
-  Consultation* CTA measured x 676-778 against a 768px viewport. Ten pixels
-  sliced off, invisible because `overflow-x: hidden` suppresses the scrollbar,
-  and unreachable because the burger menu is already hidden at that width. The
-  primary conversion action, cut off on one of the most common tablet viewports
-  there is.
-- **#215 (P2)** — Google's reCAPTCHA iframe is a fixed 304px. At 320px it ran
-  25px past the edge, clipping the branding and the privacy links.
-
-Both fixed, released as **v0.9.5**, deployed, and verified live: the CTA now
-636-752 at 768px, the widget 41-299 at 320px, and `qa-browser.mjs` reports
-nothing across five pages at five viewports.
-
-**The tool lied to me twice before I trusted it**, which is the part worth
-keeping. It reported a healthy lazy-loaded badge as broken at three viewports —
-a coarse scroll outrunning the intersection observer — and its own argument
-parser swallowed `320` as a path when `--paths` preceded `--viewports`. Both
-found and fixed by checking its output against reality before believing it. A
-checker that cries wolf is how the next real finding gets ignored, and this one
-nearly started its life doing exactly that.
-
-- **Closed:** #195, #196, #197, #198 (no change required, each with the
-  measurement), **Batch 11 milestone**; then #214, #215 and the new **Batch 16**
-  milestone, both fixed and shipped. Two releases and two deploys today, no
-  rollbacks.
-- **Next action:** Batch 12 — the eleven content and SEO issues (#199–#209).
-  These are copy judgements measured against `docs/design/REDESIGN_REVIEW.md`,
-  not measurable claims, so the browser tool does not help. Expect the same hit
-  rate and read each against the positioning document before rewriting anything.
-- **Blockers:** none on the work. Six issues wait on the site owner (#68, #110,
-  #162, #213 in Batch 13; #69, #70 in Batch 14). **#211 is still the real
-  exposure**: the lead database has one backup copy, on one workstation, with no
-  schedule — four dumps taken today, all in the same place.
-
 ### 2026-08-18 — v0.9.4 released and deployed. Production is on a number
 
 The first release and the first deploy this project has ever made through a