Registering and returning are different claims
The condition asks for two logins on two occasions, with a real gap between them. The first proves very little. It happens minutes after registration, in the same browser, with the credentials still on the clipboard or still in short term memory, and often with the session already opened for you by the registration itself. It is a statement about the form.
The second login is the statement about you. It happens after the clipboard is gone, after the browser has been closed, and after the gap has removed the parts you were relying on remembering. To do it you have to reassemble the whole set from material you kept: the address, the name, the password, and the factor if one is enrolled. None of that is exercised by the first login, which is why the first login tells you nothing.
This is the difference between having made an account and being able to become that account again. The map only cares about the second. An account you cannot re-enter is not an asset. It is a record on somebody else's machine that happens to carry your name.
Three things that have to be available at once
The address is kept somewhere that outlives the browser supplies the door. This is the part people forget, because on the first login the address is already in the bar. On the second there is no bar with anything in it, and if the string lived in a session that cleared itself, the door is missing before any credential becomes relevant.
The password exists somewhere outside your head supplies the credential in retrievable form, and the gap is the point, because it has to come out of the store rather than out of recall. You can produce the second factor on demand supplies the answer to the prompt that follows the password. If something was enrolled, that is the part most likely to be missing, because it is the only one that depends on a machine still existing.
All three have to be true at the same moment, on the same occasion. Each being true at some point in the past is not the condition. This is the first place on the map where simultaneity matters, and The total is covered at the moment you press the button is the second.
Four cards are waiting behind this gate
More of the map depends on this card than on any other in the stage. Four cards sit directly downstream and between them they open the value stage and the order stage. The mechanism is the same in every case and it is not subtle: each of those things happens inside a session, and there is no way to be inside a session you cannot enter. That is obvious written down and much less obvious when this one looks like a formality you already completed.
| Cannot hold | The reason it cannot |
|---|---|
| You hold the coin this order is priced in | What an order is denominated in is stated inside the account. From outside you can only guess what to hold, and guessing is what that card exists to prevent. |
| The deposit address came from the session you are in | It requires an address produced by the session in front of you. Without a second login there is no session in front of you, and the only candidates are old stored addresses. |
| The listing is one you have actually read | The listing text sits behind the login and is not repeated elsewhere, so the terms you would be held to cannot have been read. |
| The other side answered before you spent anything | Asking and receiving both happen inside the account. No session means no question sent and no reply visible, so the condition cannot be tested at all. |
Follow those four one step further and the reach becomes clearer. The deposit address and the fee both feed The total is covered at the moment you press the button, which feeds the parcel stage and then the close. The listing reappears at You can describe the problem in the market's own terms, since a complaint is a comparison against a listing you read. A session you cannot re-enter does not remove four cards. It removes most of what comes after this stage, silently, because nothing downstream is ever attempted.
There is a cost that does not show on the graph either. The account accumulates things a new one does not have: a history, whatever standing follows from it, any correspondence attached to it. Registering again puts you back on the map at the start of it with none of that.
Everything from the value stage onward assumes a session that can be re-entered. If this card is false those cards are not delayed, they are unreachable, and no message is produced anywhere, because nothing was ever attempted.
What the second occasion looks like when it fails
The failure is quiet and it is usually a chain of small absences rather than one refusal. You sit down and the first missing thing is the address, because the browser that had it does not have it any more. You go looking, find something that looks right, and now you have two problems, since a string recovered by searching is a string you cannot compare against anything. Then the name, which you are fairly sure about. Then the password, which you are also fairly sure about, and the form disagrees.
What makes this hard to diagnose is that the form refuses everything the same way. A wrong name, a wrong password and an address that was never the market all produce the same nothing. No field lights up to say which of the three is wrong, so people cycle, trying the other password and then the other address, and each cycle destroys information about what has been ruled out. If a factor is enrolled the failure arrives one step later and lands harder, because the password was accepted first and acceptance feels like success.
The rehearsal you can do first
You do not have to wait for the day it matters. Shut everything down. Then, using only what you keep rather than what is open, put four things in front of you: the address as characters you can read, the account name, the password retrieved from the store, and the current factor value if one is enrolled. Do not type anything anywhere. Just produce all four. A pass is all four in hand, from storage, with nothing improvised and nothing recalled. A fail is any of them missing, any arriving by way of a search rather than a place you keep things, or any available only because an application is still holding state from before. Nothing in this rehearsal requires the addresses on Onion addresses to be opened.
A claim about you rather than about the market
This card does not say the account will still be there, or that anything on the far side will behave as it did. It says your half of the arrangement survives a gap. The thing people substitute for it is a successful registration, the one piece of evidence that looks decisive and is not. How to read a card explains why the map states conditions in this direction, and If this is false covers the shape of failures that produce no message anywhere.