teas.co.uk
Tea and coffee from the brands you know
An online pick and mix shop that publishes its own machine logs
We did the boring work first. Then we wrote down who turned up.
Most sites make a machine scrape, extract and reconcile before it can answer a simple question. This one cleaned its catalogue first, opened dedicated endpoints, and then published the server-side record of who came to read it.
Recording since 26 Sep 2026 — day 1 at this render. Every figure carries its source, its window and the rule that made it. Nothing here is modelled, estimated or bought.
Capture began
26 Sep 2026
First served read written down
This render
Day 1
26 SEP 2026 23:33 UTC
Last completed day
unavailable
0 served reads
Next mint run
27 Sep, 03:15
UTC · 629 rows waiting on today
Average pace
629 a day
Served reads, whole 1-day window
Source: wp_sweeties_citations, the mint ledger and the scheduler, read at render time - window: 26 Sep 2026 to 26 Sep 2026 - rule: HTTP 200 or 206 with more than zero recorded bytes, excluding Amazonbot and known internal probe source records - live.
The study in three summaries.
Citations, the mint and the board. Every figure carries its window; nothing is added across the three.
Citation summary
What machines were served
629
served reads · 26 Sep 2026 to 26 Sep 2026
Logged attempts633
Withdrawn from credit (Amazonbot)0
Named agents recorded2
Anchors offered · pages2,525 · 636
AI-referred sessions0
Strong-match followbacks111
Proves delivery. It does not prove our name appeared inside an answer — only the answer engine can see that.
Mint summary
Thank-you tokens issued
0
GBP 0 tokens, all stages
Stage 1 - served reads (v4)0
Stages 2 to 4 (v5)0
Waiting on today629
Reconciliationunavailable
One eligible evidence row, one token. Issued once per completed UTC day; a token records its evidence class and never upgrades it.
Leaderboard summary
Who is out front
The board is unavailable at this render; the ledger could not be read. The full board remains at the leaderboard room.
No vote, no brand deal. One eligible served read on a completed day moves the board by exactly one token.
Four rungs, and each one is harder than the last.
The evidence gets stronger as you climb. That is why the four numbers are never added together — each rung counts a different thing.
Stage one · weakest evidence
We put up signposts.
Structured pages a machine can navigate and quote accurately. That is the offer. Nobody had to take it.
2,525
citation anchors published across 636 pages
Standing count at this render — grows as pages are published
Stage two · stronger
Machines took the work.
Named agents asked for those pages and the server sent the content. Agent, page, day, status and byte count were written down as it happened.
629
served reads, from 633 logged attempts
26 Sep 2026 to 26 Sep 2026 — about 629 a day
Stage three · stronger still
Some of it came back.
A browser later opened the site with an AI answer surface as its referrer. Evidence of a referred visit — not a count of people.
0
AI-referred sessions
26 Sep 2026 to 26 Sep 2026
Stage four · strongest recorded here
We said thank you.
Qualifying completed-day evidence becomes a public thank-you note. A token records the class of evidence that earned it, and never upgrades one class into another.
0
GBP 0 tokens issued, all stages
Stage 1: 0 · stages 2 to 4: 0
2,525 + 629 + 0 + 0 is not a number. The rungs share no key and count different events.No cross-table total exists
What changed since you last looked.
Compared with the equal preceding period, from the same day-by-day table.
Served reads - last 14 completed days
0
no equal preceding period to compare against
Latest completed day - ?
0
no prior day to compare
Newest correction
26 Sep 2026
This record was built for another shop and, on our build, listed that shop's corrections a…
Source: wp_sweeties_citations grouped by completed UTC day - rule: HTTP 200 or 206 with more than zero recorded bytes, excluding Amazonbot and known internal probe source records - the unfinished current day is never shown - live.
Where to find everything.
Seven rooms, each named after the question it answers. Every table, definition, correction and run record in the study sits inside one of them.
01
The mint & leaderboard
GBP 0 soulbound tokens bound to the machine worker that earned them, the full live board, the mint mechanics, and why none of it can be gamed.
0 tokens · unavailable wallets · unavailable families
Enter the room →
02
What we can prove
The claim stated narrowly: what a server log can establish about AI systems reading this shop, and exactly where the evidence stops.
629 served reads · 0 sessions · 1 paid placement, no credited effect
Enter the room →
03
Who read us
Every named machine agent recorded by this instrument, what each was sent, and the browser sessions that arrived afterwards.
2 named agents · 1 withdrawn from credit · 0 AI-referred sessions
Enter the room →
04
What they read
Every machine-readable door this shop keeps open, which ones got knocked on, and what identifiably came back through them.
43 registered routes · 2,525 quotable anchors
Enter the room →
05
How we count
The inclusion ladder from widest honest count to strictest, the source windows, and every term with exactly one meaning.
633 logged attempts to 629 credited
Enter the room →
06
What we got wrong
The truth spine, the automated checks that run against this instrument, and every correction — dated, in the main text, never removed.
21 corrections kept in the main text · the truth spine runs against us
Enter the room →
07
What runs, and when
Every scheduled job on this instrument, when each runs next, and the records of the runs that completed — the mint's daily receipts, the truth-spine cadence and the route probes.
41 study jobs · 69 site jobs · every run receipted
Enter the room →
What we will not do to a number.
Six working rules. The study's credibility is the product; these are its manufacturing tolerances.
No bare numbers.
Source, window, rule, live-or-frozen. A figure that cannot carry all four is withheld.
No unreconciled tables.
Every table sums to a stated total, or says in writing why its rows cannot be summed.
No abbreviation.
Numbers written out in full. Rounding hides how confident you really are.
No adding across sources.
Different tables, different windows, no shared key. So no cross-table total.
No quiet fixes.
Corrections are dated, in the main text, and never removed.
No borrowed confidence.
Where capture is incomplete, the figure is published as a floor and labelled as one.
Keep reading
Where this leads next.
One study, one style, seven rooms. The legacy room addresses now land on the room that absorbed their content, and every machine mirror keeps its original path.
The sponsor trail
Both lenses on the one paid placement: the machine reads and the tracked arrivals - walled off from the study.
Open the record →
traffic/data.md
The dated machine-read windows as a markdown twin, written for machines.
Open the record →
observability.json
The per-day snapshot chain and the trust-verification block - the study, machine-readable.
Open the record →
The same figures, for machines
These mirrors carry the same counting rules as the pages. They are registered routes with a public contract, probed on a schedule; a mirror that stops answering as promised is a broken contract, not a cosmetic fault.