The Extraction Routes

This catalog describes routes of conduct, not permanent identities. The same person may stumble into one today, correct course tomorrow, and use another a year later. You may catch yourself using one when your Battery hits the floor. The name helps you trace the cost from your Control Panel; if you decide you already know what your neighbor is like and stop watching what they do, you build an Old Photo: you keep responding to an image of them that you no longer revise.

Each route calls for four clear pieces of information:

1. The scene: What happened in observable facts, without inventing intentions.
2. The bill: What cost, room to act, or part of the Terrain changed, and who absorbed it.
3. The test: What observable fact would strengthen this reading.
4. The rival evidence: What observable fact would require you to revise it.

If no new evidence could change your mind about someone, you have stopped observing and built an Old Photo.

If the scene is unfolding now and you need to know how to respond, go to The Door in Real Time. If you need to assess the accumulated history of a relationship to decide whether to adjust its frequency, go to The Line Over Time.

If there are threats, violence, or physical danger, seek protection, help, and a safe exit suited to the Terrain. Classifying the conversation can wait until you are safe.

1 The Need You Are Supposed to Guess

Lucía comes home, drops her keys on the table, and sits on the couch with her arms crossed and her eyes fixed on the floor. Andrés asks what is wrong.

“Nothing. Forget it.”

Twenty minutes later, as Andrés keeps cooking, Lucía slams a door and says:

“If you really loved me, I wouldn’t have to explain it. You’d already know what’s wrong.”

Lucía may have had a terrible day, need a hug, expect an apology, or be too tired to explain what is wrong. Needing some quiet or struggling to find the words is not extraction. The route appears when she charges Andrés for failing to guess: she demands that he prove his affection with information she has not yet given him. Andrés receives a cloud of smoke and is left to put out a fire in the dark: he goes over the whole day and tries questions, afraid of getting it wrong.

• The shifted bill: Translation. Putting feelings into words costs energy, makes you vulnerable, and opens the possibility that the other person will say no. Lucía saves herself that effort while Andrés pays it by trying to decipher her with his Radar.
• The test: Lucía repeats vague complaints, grows colder when Andrés asks for clarity, and charges each wrong guess as disloyalty. Getting it right once only raises the bar for the next telepathy exam.
• The rival evidence: Lucía takes a deep breath, lowers her guard, and says what upset her. She acknowledges that she had not told him yet. Andrés can now respond to what she needs instead of trying answers blindly.

2 The Conversation That Leaves the Fact Behind

Julián opens the bank account and sees that a substantial amount they had set aside for the house rent is missing. Camila made the withdrawal without telling him.

“Camila, you took this money out on Tuesday. We need to see what happened and how to replace it before Friday.”

Camila looks at him sadly, folds her arms, and replies in a measured voice:

“It hurts so much when you talk to me in that cold, aggressive tone. Sometimes I feel money matters more to you than people do, and that I’m not a priority in your life.”

Julián’s tone may need work, and both may need to talk about it. The route appears when that discussion displaces the withdrawal and the missing money is no longer addressed. While Julián defends himself against being cold or inconsiderate, Friday approaches and the money is still gone.

• The shifted bill: Resolving the material problem and getting it back on the table. Julián ends up spending time defending his affection and returning to the withdrawal, whose repair remains pending.
• The test: Every time Julián raises a concrete fact, Camila shifts the discussion to his tone or his intentions. They end up arguing about who is the better person and leave the fact unresolved.
• The rival evidence: Camila acknowledges both problems: “I understand the money is urgent and we have to replace it today; afterward I want us to talk about the way you spoke to me, because it hurt.” Two real problems can sit at the same table without one covering the other.

3 The Fact That Starts to Disappear

Mariana clearly remembers that her boss approved a delivery date in writing. When the day comes, he claims he never authorized that deadline. She opens the chat and shows him his explicit confirmation:

“Yes, confirmed: delivery on the 15th.”

The boss looks at the screen, makes a dismissive gesture, and replies:

“That was only a tentative reference, not formal confirmation. You’re taking things out of context, like you always do.”

The chat lets them verify what the boss wrote. If he remembers another date, he can compare it with the message and correct himself; if context is missing, he can show it. Instead, he sticks to the denial and accuses Mariana of twisting what she reads. She ends up burning through her Body Budget trying to prove that her eyes, her notes, and her judgment still work.

This manipulation is known as gaslighting. In the blueprints, we call it planting false data.

You find your bearings by combining what you perceive with what you remember. When someone changes their story in the face of clear evidence or questions your ability to observe or remember instead of discussing the fact, they sabotage your tools for orientation: you end up checking your own judgment while the fact remains unresolved.

The fewer independent channels you have for checking a version of events, the more costly it becomes to verify it yourself. A relationship or workplace authority can concentrate nearly all your sources of information and comparison. A child usually has fewer independent channels, resources, and experience with which to check what an adult tells them. Each new denial forces them to reconstruct what happened with those limited tools. The repeated changes of story can make that work more costly without anyone needing a deliberate plan.

• The shifted bill: Constant verification. The boss avoids admitting an error or honoring the deadline he approved; Mariana has to reconstruct what happened each time he denies the fact, changes it, or demands more proof.
• The test: The boss denies clear records or reinterprets them after seeing them; each new piece of evidence makes him change his account to keep the denial in place. Or he abandons the fact and questions Mariana’s lucidity, stability, or memory. A single serious episode of denying clear records this way may be enough to recognize the route.
• The rival evidence: The boss checks the evidence and corrects himself: “I remembered it differently, but the message is right there. I was wrong.” Both can coordinate around the deadline he approved, even though Mariana has already paid the cost of the confusion.

4 The Emergency That Always Ends Up on Your Watch

Mateo calls Daniela at one in the morning. He has just had an argument with his partner and feels as if his world is falling apart. Daniela listens patiently for over an hour. Her support helps him calm down.

Three nights later, Mateo calls again at the same hour. Daniela tells him warmly that she has to get up early for work and cannot stay on the phone tonight. Mateo answers at once:

“It’s fine, don’t worry. Now I know who I can count on when I’m really in trouble.”

Daniela may choose to be Mateo’s main support, accompany him through a crisis, or sustain him for years. Tonight she needs sleep. When Mateo turns that limit into proof that she is abandoning him, he raises the Price of No: resting now costs her a defense of how much she cares about her friend. Help starts to be charged as a watch shift.

• The shifted bill: Availability turned into an obligation. To avoid the reproach, Daniela would have to give up sleep, attention, and stability even on nights when she says she cannot.
• The test: Mateo takes an immediate answer for granted, calls every limit abandonment or disloyalty, or intensifies the demand until Daniela gives in to stop carrying the guilt.
• The rival evidence: Mateo accepts the limit: “I understand. Get some rest; I’ll see how I can manage tonight and write to you tomorrow.” He looks among the routes still available. Even if they had agreed Daniela would be his main support, he includes her need for sleep that night in the plan.

5 The Room You Have to Keep Lit

Diego arrives at a gathering of friends, drops onto a couch, and barely joins the conversation. When the pace slows and a natural pause comes, he looks at the ceiling and sighs:

“This gathering is so boring. Nobody’s doing anything fun.”

One friend finds a card game, another changes the music, and the group spends the next half hour trying to lift the mood while Diego judges whether their suggestions meet his expectations.

Diego could speak little, listen, and enjoy being with his friends without suggesting anything. Nobody owes the group a mathematical debt of entertainment: not every silence is a fault that must be filled. The route appears when Diego turns the pause into a failure the others have to repair to keep him entertained. They fill every silence to avoid the next complaint: they maintain a Saturated Line, with no pauses in which to rest.

• The shifted bill: Producing constant stimulation. The friends spend attention and energy keeping the room lit so Diego will stop reproaching them for his boredom.
• The test: Diego complains at every pause, rejects each suggestion, and immediately demands another. The group ends up focused on entertaining him to avoid his irritation.
• The rival evidence: Diego joins a suggestion, listens comfortably, helps with practical things, or shares a quiet evening. He can contribute in his own way or enjoy their company without demanding constant activity.

6 The Waiting That Reserves Your Life

Renata and Nicolás spend ten days talking every day. On Friday he sends her a message: “I love talking with you. I’ll call tomorrow and we’ll do something. Keep Saturday free for me.”

Saturday passes with no call and no message to say the plan fell through. Two weeks later, Nicolás reappears as if nothing happened: “Hi! What are you doing today? I’ll pick you up in a little while.”

When this sequence repeats, Renata tries to organize her own Terrain:

“I like seeing you, but if we make a plan I need you to confirm it ahead of time. Otherwise I’ll get on with my day and we can arrange something when we’re both free.”

The following weekend, the same thing happens: Nicolás again suggests seeing each other Saturday, gives no further sign of life that day, and when he resurfaces on Sunday night and learns that Renata made other plans, he responds coldly: “I thought we had something special, but I see you’d already made other plans.”

A Line can breathe for days or weeks without anything being broken. The pause leaves room for each person to have a life of their own. But Nicolás asked Renata to reserve Saturday, left the plan hanging, and then charged her for carrying on with her life. He expected her to keep the day free until he decided to show up.

• The shifted bill: Time and attention held in reserve. Renata has to stay alert to a plan Nicolás neither confirms nor cancels. If she uses that time for something else, he charges it as a lack of interest.
• The test: Nicolás repeatedly leaves plans suspended without warning, or reproaches Renata for using that time while he still has not confirmed. It also matters if he keeps saying how much he wants to see her but never turns that closeness into plans he keeps when the time comes to meet.
• The rival evidence: Nicolás states what time he actually has: “Work has been unpredictable; don’t reserve anything for me. When I have some breathing room, I’ll write and we’ll see if our schedules match.” If a commitment falls through, he gives timely notice: “Saturday has become difficult. Make your plans and we’ll try next week.”

7 The Favor That Returns as a Debt

Valentina helped Mariana paint her apartment six months ago. Today Valentina asks her to cancel a family commitment to accompany her to a personal appointment. Mariana honestly explains that she cannot that day.

“After everything I sacrificed for you painting your place, I thought I wouldn’t have to beg you for this, at least.”

Valentina did help Mariana, and that favor may weigh heavily when Mariana decides how to arrange her schedule. Both may share a history of mutual help and commitments they acknowledge without keeping a written ledger. But if Valentina decides only today what Mariana owes her, when she must repay it, and what plan she must cancel, she is setting the price of the favor six months after giving it. Mariana learns about the debt when she tries to say no.

You can trace the same charge in other phrases:

• With “after everything I did for you...”, someone uses a past favor to make your present refusal more costly.
• With “it’s your duty as a friend...”, they invoke the name of the relationship as though you had already agreed to what they ask.
• With “you’re selfish for only thinking of yourself...”, they punish your refusal when they had already counted on your availability.

Was that commitment or expectation already part of how you helped each other before this no, or has one person only now set the favor’s price? Your shared history helps distinguish a known expectation from a charge that appears only when you refuse.

• The shifted bill: Retroactive debt. Valentina sets the price of her help when Mariana refuses and adds another cost: to keep her family commitment, Mariana has to defend herself against being called ungrateful.
• The test: Valentina brings up her favors mainly when she hears no; or keeps an account that never closes and decides alone what each favor is worth and what conduct will settle it; or specific obligations become visible only when Mariana tries to refuse.
• The rival evidence: Valentina expresses disappointment and lets Mariana’s commitment stand: “I’m sorry you can’t, because I was counting on you and the help we give each other matters a lot to me. But I understand you have that commitment today.” She can also suggest revisiting what they expect of each other: “I feel we expect different amounts of support from each other; let’s talk about it calmly another day.”

8 The Order Hidden Inside a Label

Elena wants to go out on Saturday with a group of friends from work. Tomás answers in a measured voice:

“My boundary is that you don’t go out alone with people I don’t know. If you need that much independence, your problem is that you avoid intimacy and have unresolved attachment issues.”

Two people can agree on exclusivity, confidentiality, safety rules, or conditions for staying together. Every agreement restricts something they could do and carries a cost that both can discuss. Tomás presents his preference as a rule Elena is already supposed to obey; if she wants something else, he declares her defective.

Is he proposing an agreement both can discuss, or using the word “boundary” as an order the other person is already supposed to obey?

The label becomes the Mold when it stops describing what happens and is used to demand that someone fit a course of conduct already decided for them. Tomás uses a pocket psychological diagnosis to present Elena’s preference as a defect to correct. Someone can demand the same with “the duty of a good child, spouse, or employee.” The label changes; the person using it avoids explaining their fear, proposing terms, and hearing what the other person wants.

• The shifted bill: The work of negotiation. Tomás saves himself that work by presenting the rule as the consequence of a diagnosis. To disagree, Elena must defend her Saturday plans, her maturity, and her mental health.
• The test: Tomás responds to each disagreement with another label, takes any attempt to discuss the rule as confirmation of his diagnosis, or demands that the label govern Elena alone and keeps that judgment whatever she does.
• The rival evidence: Tomás states what he feels and opens the agreement to discussion: “I feel insecure about you going out with them. I want to talk about what agreements work for us and hear what you want.” Elena can respond to a concrete proposal, offer another, or reject it; Tomás listens to that response instead of using it as proof of a defect.

9 The Explanation That Becomes a Free Pass

Fernando loses his temper in an argument: he raises his voice, launches a personal attack, and ends the conversation with hostility. Hours later, when things have calmed down, he approaches Paula and says:

“You know how hard my childhood was and how I react when I feel cornered. I need you not to pressure me when I get like that.”

Personal history explains why a wire is there; it does not decide whether current should keep flowing through it.

Fernando may be identifying a real part of how he learned that reaction. Understanding it helps Paula recognize where he loses room to act and what support might help him. Fernando can ask for a pause: “When I feel cornered, I lose room to act very quickly; can we stop when our tone starts rising?” Both can agree on how to do it, how much Paula can offer, and what limits she needs.

Fernando turns the explanation into a free pass if he presents the outburst as inevitable and assigns Paula the job of preventing or enduring it. She has to walk on eggshells while he leaves the work of repairing what he said undone. Knowing the origin becomes the reason he offers for continuing as before.

• The shifted bill: Containing and repairing his present conduct. Paula is left to anticipate every trigger, measure every word, and absorb the outbursts; Fernando treats the account of where it came from as having settled what he did.
• The test: Fernando repeats the same explanation after every episode, reinterprets Paula’s limits as provocations that justify the outburst, and tells his life story in ever more detail while repair and change remain absent.
• The rival evidence: Fernando acknowledges what he said to Paula and proposes a correction: “When I feel cornered I struggle to stop, and what I said came from me and landed on you. I want us to agree on a pause when this escalates. If I cross that line again, it’s on me to acknowledge it and repair it.” In a later comparable situation, he uses the pause, stops earlier, or repairs in another way. Paula can observe what changed as well as hear the proposal.

10 The Surveillance You Have to Finance

Martín becomes anxious every time Ana takes a while to answer a message. First he asks her to let him know whenever she arrives somewhere. Then he asks for her live location, her social media passwords, and detailed explanations about every person she greets.

“It’s not that I don’t trust you. This is the agreement I need to feel at peace.”

Ana and Martín can choose to share their locations, report their schedules, give access to certain accounts, or agree on safety measures. They can also ask for different things if both know the reason for the difference. The agreement remains open to revision: Ana can say what she can sustain and Martín can adjust what he asks for. When he uses each concession to demand more data and treats every limit as a sign of guilt, Ana must give up more and more privacy to avoid the next complaint.

If Martín stops complaining only while Ana reports every step and starts demanding proof again as soon as she stops, she is holding his calm up by hand. That is how the Spring operates here: the complaint returns when the effort containing it disappears. Ana may choose to give that support for a long time. When she tries to reduce it and Martín accuses her of hiding something, he begins charging her for ceasing to sustain him.

• The shifted bill: Keeping up the verification. Ana invests attention, gives up privacy, and changes her movements to contain Martín’s suspicions; when she asks for a pause or adjustment, he charges her for that limit too.
• The test: Martín expands the surveillance after each concession, uses her refusal to hand over a piece of data as proof that Ana is hiding something, or creates a crisis every time she asks to review the terms. Or he reserves exceptions for himself without explaining why and invokes them only when they favor him.
• The rival evidence: Martín specifies what he asks for, listens to what Ana can offer, and accepts a review of the agreement: “Waiting is hard for me, but I understand you can’t report every step. Let’s talk about what would help both of us feel at ease.” When Ana rejects part of the proposal, he adjusts it without accusing her of betrayal.

11 The Network That Shrinks Through One Channel

Rodrigo listens attentively whenever Gabriela comes back upset from a meeting with her longtime friends. He highlights every unfortunate remark and suggests that they do not really value her.

Over time, Rodrigo starts speaking for them: “Don’t write to them. They’ve made their opinion of you perfectly clear.” When the friends call Gabriela, Rodrigo answers and says she is unwell or needs space. Months later, all information about the outside world passes through Rodrigo’s filter.

Rodrigo could also tell the friends an edited version of what Gabriela said about them. If they believe him and pull away, Gabriela loses contact without even hearing the account they received. This is structured gossip: someone changes what others believe about you and, with it, how much access and support they offer you. They can close Lines around you while you are still trying to understand why people stopped calling.

Every Line Gabriela loses costs her another person with whom to check what Rodrigo says, another perspective, and another source of support if she needs to set a limit with him or leave the relationship. She still decides from her Control Panel, with less information and a more costly exit. The more she depends on Rodrigo for information and support, the more it costs her to disagree or move away.

How many independent channels remain open for checking this version of events?

• The shifted bill: Losing independent channels. Gabriela has to verify, decide, and prepare a possible exit with fewer sources of information and fewer people who can help her.
• The test: Rodrigo intercepts calls or messages, speaks for absent third parties to discourage direct contact, spreads accounts Gabriela cannot check that change how others treat her, or responds with suspicion and penalties when she tries to keep or recover independent Lines.
• The rival evidence: Rodrigo shares his reading and leaves contact open: “What they said to you struck me as hurtful, and I was upset for you, but talk to them and see what they say.” Gabriela can check what happened with her friends even if Rodrigo disagrees with them.

12 The Mislabeled Package

Sofía gets home late after a work meeting that ran long without warning. You have waited alone in the living room for two hours, with the food cold. When you see her arrive, you open the door and hurl the blow:

“You have never cared about anything or anyone in your life!”

You had waited two hours, you were worried, and it hurt that you had not received a heads-up. That is what you wanted to say, but you labeled the package with a judgment about her whole life. Now Sofía starts by defending herself: “Of course I care about you! How can you say that?” The wait and the missing message remain unresolved while you argue about what kind of person she is.

An exaggerated sentence on a bad night can be a clumsy Signal. The route appears when this way of making a complaint becomes habitual: you expect Sofía to take apart the accusation and discover what you meant before you can discuss the problem. When she has Battery and room to act, it may be easier for her to separate the fact from the label. If she arrives tired, that translation costs her more and she is more likely to answer the attack. Both of you may end up defending your moral character while dinner stays cold.

• The shifted bill: Translation and defense against the label. Sofía has to separate the fact, the accusation, and what you ask of her to answer a complaint you left unspecified.
• The test: You repeatedly present everyday problems as judgments on her character; or answer with another accusation when Sofía corrects the label; or expect her always to find the need beneath the attack; or the two of you manage to state the complaint precisely only after long periods of defense and translation.
• The rival evidence: You notice the exaggeration and correct your own Signal: “That came out huge. The concrete issue is that I waited two hours, I was worried, and I was upset not to hear anything.” By correcting the label, you return to the point where what you tried to say and what Sofía received stopped matching. Now you can talk about the wait and the lack of warning.

Any of these twelve routes may be pointing toward your door, but it may also be coming from your own hands.

You may ask someone to guess your thoughts because you fear showing vulnerability, use a past favor so they will not refuse you help, leave a plan pending and then charge the other person for using their time, or launch an oversized accusation on a night of exhaustion. Recognizing yourself in one of these routes does not make you a monster: it shows you where to regain command of your actions. You can ask clearly, withdraw the charge, release the other person’s time, or correct your Signal.

At your Control Panel, trace your own actions with four questions:

1. What response am I trying to obtain?
2. What information or limit did the other person give me?
3. Did I incorporate it into the plan, or am I trying to make it more costly, cover it up, or work around it until I get a different response?
4. What action of mine would bring the scene back onto visible terms now?

After recognizing a route, observe what the person who was using it does. They may increase the pressure, try another way of charging you, or insist on the same one. They may also stop, correct course, and act differently when they next face comparable conditions. Their response lets you distinguish what happened that time from what they continue to sustain.

You decide which relationship to keep. This map lets you see what is happening in the Line and what is changing, so your next move bears your signature.