Working notes · source material

Provenance audit

Having caught one fabricated card, the obvious question is what else? So I traced every project card back to authored source material to see which ones have roots and which ones don’t.

Unfinished — a record of the audit as it was run. Point-in-time findings against my Notion résumé versions and portfolio tracker. Raw material for the write-up, not a conclusion I’ve published.

The test

A card is anchored if it traces to an authored, upstream source — primarily the master résumé, which is the declared source of truth (“every metric and achievement lives here first”). Two things explicitly do not count as corroboration, because both are generated from the site:

Counting either as evidence is what let the IaC card pass the first time. So the only vote that counts is the résumé — or, for a forward-looking lab project, a real skill/experience it plainly extends.

Selected Work — all anchored

All nine “Selected Work” cards trace cleanly to résumé bullets (Golden Helix and Zoot). No inventions in this section.

CardStatusAnchor in the résumé
Enterprise NAS migrationreal“deployed an enterprise NAS appliance with zero-data-loss cutover” — has a linked case study
IaC standardizationreal“Standardized AWS infrastructure with OpenTofu… automated Linux… with Ansible”
Company-wide MFA rolloutreal“introduced MFA and centralized Linux authentication across all user accounts”
Three-month ISP migrationreal“coordinated a 3-month ISP migration from locate through activation”
Hypervisor cluster expansionreal“racked and integrated a new hypervisor node into the cluster” (VMware → Proxmox)
One-person MarTech functionreal“Assumed full ownership of marketing operations following staff departure”
Follow-the-Sun, Frankfurtreal“two-year assignment in Europe to develop and launch Zoot’s Follow the Sun support model”
Emergency DC shutdownreal“unplanned emergency shutdown of Zoot’s Frankfurt datacenter… turndown and recovery”
Cross-team protocolsreal“cutting escalations from 2 calls per 48 hours to 2 calls per month”

Projects & PoCs — where the problems are

This is the section the fabrication lived in. Three tiers came out of it.

CardVerdictWhat the trace found
NetBox + MCPrealDirectly in the résumé: “Architected an agentic IT management system integrating NetBox with Claude via MCP.” Done, not planned.
This website as a case studyrealThe site demonstrably exists; résumé has “Implemented deployment pipeline for web development.”
Home-lab reference stackgrounded planNo past-work claim, but built on real tooling (Proxmox / OpenTofu / Ansible all in Skills). Honest as a forward-looking lab.
Observability stack on the labgrounded planExtends real skills (Grafana, Prometheus, added in résumé v4). Forward-looking, not a false claim.
Email deliverability labgrounded planExtends genuine MarTech work (email deliverability, segmentation, automation across 52K+ contacts).
Ticket triage w/ approval gatespromoted ideaNo résumé anchor. Only authored trace is one bracketed example in an April feedback note (see below).
Runbook execution agentpromoted ideaSame: no résumé anchor; same April bracketed list. Not work done or scoped.
IaC diff review agentpromoted ideaSame seed; the card’s specifics (OpenTofu plan reviewer, stack, tagline) are invented on top of it.

The one thing that complicates the story

The audit did not confirm the IaC card as a pure zero-root fabrication. There is a single shallow seed. An April note — “LinkedIn Feedback & 3-Way Audit,” authored advice about positioning, not a résumé — contains this line:

“…agentic IT assistance for [ticket triage / log analysis / runbook execution / IaC diff review]…”

So the phrase was seeded — as one of four illustrative examples of agent-on-ops work I could pilot. Three of those four (ticket triage, runbook execution, IaC diff review) were then promoted into concrete “Planned” project cards, each dressed with an invented stack and tagline. The fourth (log analysis) wasn’t.

That refines the verdict rather than reversing it:

What this leaves to clean up