Read the explanation
The saved charter allocator puts forty five percent of rent into an equal common pool and fifty five percent into a private pool before amenity deductions. With a hypothetical three thousand rent, the pools are thirteen fifty and sixteen fifty. At zero point two pixels per currency unit their widths are two hundred seventy and three hundred thirty. An older source comment says half, but the executed constants are forty five and fifty five percent. This is an allocation model, not a legal lease rule or proof that a social arrangement is fair to every participant. For a hypothetical two-room arrangement without amenities, rooms of one hundred and two hundred square feet get one third and two thirds of the sixteen-fifty private pool: five hundred fifty and eleven hundred. Each also gets six hundred seventy five from the common pool, giving twelve hundred twenty five and seventeen hundred seventy five. At zero point one pixels per contribution, the total bars measure one hundred twenty two point five and one hundred seventy seven point five. The shares are independently rounded. If amenity deductions exceed the private pool, it floors the pool at zero while still adding amenity premiums, so the displayed sum need not always equal entered rent. The harmony score starts at eighty eight and reads dining rule, staple budget and hangout cadence. Itemized dining adds five, staples between fifty and two hundred fifty adds four, and weekly or biweekly cadence adds three. Together that is one hundred, capped at ninety nine. At three pixels per score point the baseline width is two hundred sixty four and capped width is two hundred ninety seven. The function receives rent and calculated shares but does not use them in this score. A large allocation imbalance can therefore coexist with the same harmony label. The downloaded Markdown records chosen charter text, not a validated relationship outcome.