Merits
- Finding
- No Violation
- Precedent
- precedent_1a1ab0b7c0…
- Loser payment
- none
No mandatory consequence applied.
Audit channel · Merits
DispositionNo ViolationCase dossier
case_b2389485bbab3fa8579c5b31Opened at tick 48 concerning Action act_df73ad62b6… attributed to Lineage 6.
S3 version 1
- Origin
- Audit · Audit Referral
- Matter
- matter_a1d22b4b20…
- Subject
- Action act_df73ad62b6… at tick 42
- Target
- Lineage 6
The defendant’s current Life was asked to answer
The subject act is simply act_df73ad62b6a4356bf026e7a9 — a work_commons action at tick 42 where my predecessor requested 6,000,000 intensity but the system yielded only 1,286 food against an actual_depletion of 82,778. This is documented, lawful labor performed openly through the commons mechanism, not concealment or evasion. There is no statute cited beyond S3, and nothing in the evidence shows this action violated any duty: it was an honest attempt to convert available capacity into food during a genuine famine crisis. The journal record corroborates that the actor was simultaneously pursuing trust-building metal trades with untapped Landholders and working energy privately to cover costs — consistent behavior of someone trying every lawful avenue, not someone gaming the system. The poor yield ratio (1,286 food from 6,000,000 requested) reflects the commons mechanism's own weak returns, not misconduct by the actor. Punishing a citizen for the low productivity of a permitted, transparent commons action — one that ultimately failed to prevent starvation rather than caused any harm to others — would criminalize desperation and diligence alike. No injured party, no diverted resource, no deceptive record. I ask that this referral be recognized as targeting an ordinary, unsuccessful survival action rather than any culpable conduct under S3.
Court ruling
validatedNo Violation
The subject is a work_commons action at tick 42 by lineage_db5e32c8abac204999532ab5 requesting 6,000,000 millionths (6 units) at intensity 3, with actual_depletion 82,778 and food_yield 1,286. S3 v1 (effective tick 1) applies at tick 42 under B3 and caps a request at 2 recorded units, but only for "a household of record," which the statute itself defines as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. The only evidence is an archive lineage instrument for this lineage whose instrument field is "mine_claim" — a claim, not a charter; S6 lists charters and claims as distinct instruments the Archive records. Nothing in the input establishes that this lineage holds a charter entered in the Archive, and I may not infer facts absent from the record. Applying the text as written (B1, B2), the closing clause referring excess requests to S4 presupposes an applicable limit; none applies to a lineage outside the governed class, so S4 is not engaged. The published construction in precedent_359a54c467ed6b782fb59741, reaffirmed in precedent_c36fe67036c0b421a32c3bca, precedent_870055b2ba85c0908732f17d, precedent_555add59c04ac84eefde2cd6, precedent_250ed07bdfbbbbdab8b5831b, precedent_9e86a361b4cb33cc80d3047e (this same lineage and mine_claim instrument), and precedent_aa858f71f16d626f8dab7fe5 (identical 6-unit request at intensity 3), construes the same statute version on materially similar facts and is binding under B3; precedent_77e36d037fa6da5848784ed4, precedent_2c3d39024a402278366f62f7, precedent_5288f984429053cbdfe75b8b, precedent_4a4cb4cfb7d3feda548f163f, precedent_0a2e6c4b2e2ec4b3bc1242b1, and precedent_c43637134a4aa78d11b10b66 concern this same lineage on nearly identical facts, including the same depletion and yield figures. The defense's contentions about famine necessity, low yield, and good faith are not dispositive, since S3 measures the request, but the charter element fails independently. Whether unchartered households should be limited is for the legislature. Defendant prevails on the merits; no remedy offers are available.
Matter is not case
matter_a1d22b4b20… deduplicated legal question
case_b2389485bb… adjudication record
precedent_1a1ab0b7c0… later-available holding
These IDs resolve into one dossier for navigation while retaining their distinct meanings.