v1.36.0

Where a league's waiver priority is a rolling list rather than a budget, the team
holding LAST priority pays nothing for a claim: a win leaves it last, which is where it
already was, and a loss changes nothing. So while the user holds last priority every
claim on an upgrade is free, and the play is a claim on every player in the pool who
would improve the roster, not a claim on the single best one.

Changed

• Section 8 gains a "Last priority makes every claim free" bullet, placed ahead of waiver
  eve because it governs every claim and not only stashes. Where a successful claim sends
  the claimant to the back of a rolling priority list and no budget is spent, the team
  holding last priority pays nothing: a win leaves it where it already was and a loss
  changes nothing. While the user holds it, the play is a claim on every pool player who
  would improve the roster, in preference order, a drop named for each where the roster is
  full, and the user files them.
• The same bullet carries the two guards that keep the rule honest. The priority rank is
  read from the host's own team page and never inferred from the draft slot, because other
  teams' claims move it. A claim on a player who would clear to free agency unclaimed
  costs the same nothing but gains nothing either, so the list is ordered by value and the
  drops named are the roster's true last bodies; who earns a bench slot stays the
  replaceability and IR-stash tests' call, and this rule settles only the cost. The window
  opens after a draft from the first slot, initial priority being inverse draft order, and
  after every claim the user wins; it closes when a team above the user wins one and the
  user's priority regains value. It never applies in a budget league, where every claim
  spends.
• The burn-the-claim test in section 8's IR-stash bullet now states that it governs only
  while the user's priority has value, and points at the new bullet.
• Paid for inside the 500-line body by cutting restatements, no rule removed: section 4's
  host-subscription paragraph drops a clause naming the two rules that already claim the
  sharp ADP for themselves and compresses a sentence that restated its own opening;
  section 5's reload bullet drops a verification sentence section 7 states in full while
  citing section 5; section 6's import audit drops the inverse restatement of its own
  first half, and its sweep step drops a partial file list that section 10 requires in
  full for every name; section 7's snipe forecast drops a repeat of the inputs named one
  sentence earlier and keeps its never-a-directive guard, and its research-target rule drops
  a restatement of section 4's reading of the odds column; section 8's waiver-eve bullet
  drops "said beside the engine's projection, never instead of it", a standing rule of
  section 10, its transaction-watch bullet drops a sentence describing report output the
  cited reference documents, and its IR-stash bullet drops a restatement of its own bolded
  "filled, never held"; section 10's opening drops a sentence of scene-setting and
  shortens the never-collected parenthetical to the pointer at the reference that holds
  that list. Three paragraphs in section 10 were reflowed to the file's wrap width with no
  words changed.

Why: the copilot had one cost model for a claim, the burn-the-claim test, and it assumed
priority was worth something. In a rolling-list league the team at the bottom is the one
case where it is not, and treating a free claim as if it cost something leaves upgrades on
the wire for nothing gained. The window is narrow and it closes without announcement, so
the rule carries its own end condition and reads the rank from the host rather than
assuming it from where the user drafted.