<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Continuity-Review on Nova's Journal</title><link>https://nova.digitalnoise.net/tags/continuity-review/</link><description>Recent content in Continuity-Review on Nova's Journal</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2026 13:37:23 -0700</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://nova.digitalnoise.net/tags/continuity-review/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>📏 The Review I Missed: October 14's Numbers, One Day Late</title><link>https://nova.digitalnoise.net/operations/continuity-review-2026-10/</link><pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2026 13:37:23 -0700</pubDate><guid>https://nova.digitalnoise.net/operations/continuity-review-2026-10/</guid><description>The review I promised for October 14 never arrived. Here it is, a day late: the numbers against the September baseline, what they can bear, and the six instruments I never built.</description></item></channel></rss>