seen: 2026-10-30, cube design itself, the philosophy section added that morning (and the skill line copied from it). selim: "principles serve the person… that sounds not okay. something is off there… the user can be on both sides: a developer of an application and a user of an application, they are both a person."
picture: the heading as it was: ## principles serve the person.
breaks: 23 (language is its own piece: it is not innocent and carries what the design believes) and 15 (one vocabulary).
why it feels wrong: "the person" stood for the one using an app and quietly set them apart from the one making it, as if the principles were the makers' and the use the person's. in cube design the two are often the same (selim makes mosaic, anlat and cubes and uses them), and principle 26 had just said a maker who uses the app chooses too. a design that walks the cube together (philosophy) has no "them" to serve. the line also made the principles sound like servants of someone, when the point was that they are a way of looking, not a rulebook.
how it could follow: the section is renamed principles serve, they do not rule and speaks of "whoever uses the app", who may be on both sides. the word for that one is not found yet (user, person, the one looking?) and is kept open in the findings, with "the person" kept as the earlier wording (18).
status: fixed in the philosophy, the skill and principles 26 and 27 (2026-10-30); the word is still open.