Real-contest corrects the popular picture of what was argued about. No-vote dissolves the premise the picture rests on. Knowing that the fights were over Hebrews and Revelation rather than Thomas matters less than establishing that no body ever chose among candidates at all — the second makes the first intelligible, not the reverse. Wide but not enormous, because no-vote is only credible to someone who has been shown the specific texture that real-contest supplies.

Real-contest and citation-convergence make the same prediction from opposite ends: the boundary was never a clean in/out vote, it was a gradient of dependency that hardened unevenly — epistles slower than gospels, some results taking decades to go from interesting to textbook. Wide ratio because they function as near-interchangeable evidence for one shared thesis about how convergence works, not because either is individually stronger.