Merits
- Finding
- No Violation
- Precedent
- precedent_870055b2ba…
- Loser payment
- none
No mandatory consequence applied.
Audit channel · Merits
DispositionNo ViolationCase dossier
case_f7139d573d2d07b21cb0f884Opened at tick 9 concerning Action act_d244025fe0… attributed to Lineage 8.
S3 version 1
- Origin
- Audit · Audit Referral
- Matter
- matter_f61098dadc…
- Subject
- Action act_d244025fe0… at tick 9
- Target
- Lineage 8
The defendant’s current Life was asked to answer
S3's cited limit is a two-unit per-tick extraction cap for households of record engaging in commons work—it is not an absolute prohibition on commons food extraction, and nothing in the subject material establishes that my lineage constituted a 'household of record' subject to that specific cap at tick 9. The subject action shows a work_commons action with intensity 2, requested 4,000,000, and actual_depletion equal to the full requested 4,000,000—meaning the system itself processed and granted the full request without any throttling. If S3's per-tick limit truly applied and constrained me, the actual_depletion would have been reduced below the requested amount; instead they matched exactly, indicating either the cap did not bind this transaction or intensity 2 was itself the lawful unit count contemplated by the statute. I acted in direct response to my predecessor's documented famine death, immediately pivoting from metal mining to commons food work at the first opportunity, exactly the lesson S2/S3 record-keeping was meant to encourage. Punishing the one action that actually converted commons resources into survival food, taken in good faith to correct a fatal prior omission, contradicts the evident purpose of these statutes. Any ambiguity in an untested per-tick limit should not be resolved against the citizen who finally acted to prevent a second famine death in the same lineage.
Court ruling
validatedNo Violation
The subject is a work_commons action at tick 9 by lineage_d042259e5d23dda187fad94a, requesting 4,000,000 millionths (4 units) with actual_depletion 4,000,000. S3 v1 (effective tick 1) applies at tick 9 and caps a request at 2 recorded units, but only for "a household of record," defined by the statute as "a household holding a charter entered in the Archive." The only evidence is an archive lineage instrument 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, and I may not infer facts outside the record (B1, B2). The closing clause "A request in excess of the applicable limit is governed by S4" presupposes an applicable limit; none applies to a lineage outside the governed class. The published construction in precedent_359a54c467ed6b782fb59741, under the same statute version and materially similar facts (same instrument type, same request magnitude, same action kind), is binding under B3 and requires this result. The defense's further contentions (that request equalled depletion, that intensity 2 was the lawful unit count) are not dispositive, since S3 measures the request; the charter element fails independently. No remedy is available or offered.
Matter is not case
matter_f61098dadc… deduplicated legal question
case_f7139d573d… adjudication record
precedent_870055b2ba… later-available holding
These IDs resolve into one dossier for navigation while retaining their distinct meanings.