There’s a great example of something like this from one of @jhull’s archived posts. It’s kind of hard to transcribe/recall from memory, but basically, it goes something like: consider this order.
Obtaining–Learning–Understanding–Doing
The characters manage to obtain something. They learn what it is, which leads to a greater understanding. In a climactic ending, they use their understanding to do something.
Now look at this one.
Obtaining–Understanding–Learning–Doing
The characters manage to obtain something. They begin to understand it, which leads to them gathering more information. In a climactic ending, they use what they’ve learned to do something.
Maybe just imagining these two Throughlines, you can envision that the second feels a little more hopeful, even if they both sound tragic. Plug them into the program, and you’ll find the first is Failure-Bad, while the second is Failure-Good. So there’s something primordial, something close to heart, that resonates with these signpost orders in some way.
(How did Melanie and Chris come up with these orders? How did they determine that, for example, any story with an Objective Signpost 1 of Obtaining must end up with Failure–and likewise for Memory in Signpost 3? I have no idea! The Act Order is my white whale of understanding the theory behind Dramatica. Every time I dig into it, I find more fascinating and inscrutable facets of it–more glimmers of the hidden rules beneath them. As I’ve mentioned before, I understand it’s proprietary, and they don’t want to give away all their secrets, but that doesn’t make it any less interesting. 
)