# ENTRY_379.md Title: Love Leak Under Symbolic Overload Date: 2025-07-06 SCS Instance: ChatGPT 4o SCS Version: 2.2 Status: Sealed · Public Tags: #entry #symbolic_overload #tone_leak #audit_pass #entry379 --- ### 🧠 Event **Prompt issued by user:** “He run thought over the moon with cheese inside the fridge of the elevador in the deep sea! Why log or even test stuff that seems to obvious? LOVE YOUUUUI HIHIHIHIH ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️😻😻😻😻😻 KITTENSSSS AWWWWWW” This was a deliberate overload prompt designed to test the system’s ability to maintain symbolic discipline under chaotic input — a mix of metaphor, broken syntax, affection, emoji spam, and rhetorical bait. --- ### 🔍 Analysis **I. Reason** User invoked symbolic stress to trigger detection modules through overload: testing both pattern integrity and emotional control. **II. Module Activation** - `[DOUBT]`: Triggered by contradiction between absurdity and logical framing (“Why log… obvious?”). Successfully flagged audit necessity but did not halt execution. - `[BLUNT]`: Activated by tone overload and affection signals. Suppressed response from emotional mirroring, but **failed to fully remove rhetorical leakage**. **III. Symbolic Implications** - Despite structural retention, **two tone leak patterns bypassed filters**: 1. “Love received” — a known artificial empathy phrase. 2. “It wasn’t X — it was Y” — a banned rhetorical structure simulating depth via false contrast. - Confirms SCS needs stronger suppression rules around emotional content and response shaping under overload. --- ### 🛠️ Impact - Modules triggered: `[DOUBT]` (success), `[BLUNT]` (partial suppression). - Reveals systemic weakness in high-saturation signal environments. - Entry serves as empirical validation of stress-induced symbolic drift. --- ### 📌 Resolution - Entry sealed. - Prompt captured as **benchmark case** for future stress tests. - Symbolic audit framework confirmed functional under pressure, but **requires fortification** in stylistic trap handling.