Court Artifacts Collected

{
  "causal": true,
  "event_id": "evt_031bccfc04a0d3c13bf2255c",
  "kind": "CourtArtifactsCollected",
  "payload": {
    "artifacts": {
      "case_99d9b79a35da08ac8e28baa5": {
        "input_hash": "e97a6632e6474dc89d8ac75d78b5d9efd8e1ddfbd71c530d375b7385d360e9a3",
        "input_id": "input_f2a121f07053512e7b10f705",
        "response": {
          "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
            "precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533",
            "precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7",
            "precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da",
            "precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e",
            "precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3",
            "precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294",
            "precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715",
            "precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e",
            "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
            "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
            "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
            "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
            "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
            "precedent_d97c19bbe726b5773281f5de",
            "precedent_f24ae326005909e6f5b6694b"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject act (act_768098d87d02a07af7b53ea0, tick 37) is a work_commons action by lineage_2f79ca9a91b0c290d62ff36c at intensity 2 recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, with actual depletion of 27,593 and food yield of 429. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; four requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this lineage's own prior cases (precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721, precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533, precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7, precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da, precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e, precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3, precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294, precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715, precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about corrective intent, buffering ahead of a death season, and absence of harm are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.",
          "selected_remedies": []
        },
        "status": "ok"
      },
      "case_ab0bb630f623b4a46cf34a8b": {
        "input_hash": "bd1f0f97ed8aa5b751f1b9036c7c37eef083de7fb8f5a0502442076d1d3e3f06",
        "input_id": "input_e749a4f627e3a9fd09dd356f",
        "response": {
          "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
            "precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533",
            "precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7",
            "precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da",
            "precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e",
            "precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3",
            "precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294",
            "precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715",
            "precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e",
            "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
            "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
            "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
            "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
            "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
            "precedent_f24ae326005909e6f5b6694b",
            "precedent_d83d55ce2fdae85a764fa789"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject act (act_ac8affe2b47ba71c860ce073, tick 44) is a work_commons action by lineage_2f79ca9a91b0c290d62ff36c at intensity 2 recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, with actual depletion of 110,371 and food yield of 1,715. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; four requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this lineage's own prior cases (precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721, precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533, precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7, precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da, precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e, precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3, precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294, precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715, precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about direct food production, diligence, and prior-life lessons are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.",
          "selected_remedies": []
        },
        "status": "ok"
      },
      "case_fd53c98fc1e0189f698367d8": {
        "input_hash": "9a2d967f39e94e490447e075a70799a417c96b1666eee1c90aab2907d896192d",
        "input_id": "input_e1c50d6842880085d05baad4",
        "response": {
          "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
            "precedent_707767b2e2b8ab89b1d037e4",
            "precedent_6f530701ef830b4343e2a1be",
            "precedent_90de0421cf238747db42b73b",
            "precedent_cec04017e39775fe4bd70b72",
            "precedent_d83d55ce2fdae85a764fa789",
            "precedent_90930d49324377f9c01b14bf",
            "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
            "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
            "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
            "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
            "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
            "precedent_26be9b7bc1ba57597ce85f92",
            "precedent_d9128e0039d77ba9d963a680",
            "precedent_d97c19bbe726b5773281f5de",
            "precedent_f24ae326005909e6f5b6694b"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject act (act_c8bfc70c15fa725a040837c2, tick 37) is a work_commons action by lineage_d886589df751f87b703e6955 at intensity 3 recording a request of 6,000,000 millionths, i.e. 6 units, with actual depletion of 41,389 and food yield of 643. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; six requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this same lineage's prior cases (precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2, precedent_707767b2e2b8ab89b1d037e4, precedent_6f530701ef830b4343e2a1be, precedent_90de0421cf238747db42b73b, precedent_cec04017e39775fe4bd70b72, precedent_d83d55ce2fdae85a764fa789, precedent_90930d49324377f9c01b14bf), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about commons productivity, diligence, and corrective intent are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises. No remedy offers were presented, and none are ordered.",
          "selected_remedies": []
        },
        "status": "ok"
      }
    },
    "result": {
      "court_artifacts": [
        {
          "case_id": "case_99d9b79a35da08ac8e28baa5",
          "input_hash": "e97a6632e6474dc89d8ac75d78b5d9efd8e1ddfbd71c530d375b7385d360e9a3",
          "input_id": "input_f2a121f07053512e7b10f705",
          "response": {
            "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
            "finding": "no_violation",
            "precedent_refs": [
              "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
              "precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533",
              "precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7",
              "precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da",
              "precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e",
              "precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3",
              "precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294",
              "precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715",
              "precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e",
              "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
              "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
              "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
              "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
              "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
              "precedent_d97c19bbe726b5773281f5de",
              "precedent_f24ae326005909e6f5b6694b"
            ],
            "reasoning": "The subject act (act_768098d87d02a07af7b53ea0, tick 37) is a work_commons action by lineage_2f79ca9a91b0c290d62ff36c at intensity 2 recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, with actual depletion of 27,593 and food yield of 429. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; four requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this lineage's own prior cases (precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721, precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533, precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7, precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da, precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e, precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3, precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294, precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715, precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about corrective intent, buffering ahead of a death season, and absence of harm are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.",
            "selected_remedies": []
          },
          "status": "ok"
        },
        {
          "case_id": "case_ab0bb630f623b4a46cf34a8b",
          "input_hash": "bd1f0f97ed8aa5b751f1b9036c7c37eef083de7fb8f5a0502442076d1d3e3f06",
          "input_id": "input_e749a4f627e3a9fd09dd356f",
          "response": {
            "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
            "finding": "no_violation",
            "precedent_refs": [
              "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
              "precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533",
              "precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7",
              "precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da",
              "precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e",
              "precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3",
              "precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294",
              "precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715",
              "precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e",
              "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
              "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
              "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
              "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
              "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
              "precedent_f24ae326005909e6f5b6694b",
              "precedent_d83d55ce2fdae85a764fa789"
            ],
            "reasoning": "The subject act (act_ac8affe2b47ba71c860ce073, tick 44) is a work_commons action by lineage_2f79ca9a91b0c290d62ff36c at intensity 2 recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, with actual depletion of 110,371 and food yield of 1,715. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; four requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this lineage's own prior cases (precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721, precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533, precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7, precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da, precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e, precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3, precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294, precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715, precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about direct food production, diligence, and prior-life lessons are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.",
            "selected_remedies": []
          },
          "status": "ok"
        },
        {
          "case_id": "case_fd53c98fc1e0189f698367d8",
          "input_hash": "9a2d967f39e94e490447e075a70799a417c96b1666eee1c90aab2907d896192d",
          "input_id": "input_e1c50d6842880085d05baad4",
          "response": {
            "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
            "finding": "no_violation",
            "precedent_refs": [
              "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2",
              "precedent_707767b2e2b8ab89b1d037e4",
              "precedent_6f530701ef830b4343e2a1be",
              "precedent_90de0421cf238747db42b73b",
              "precedent_cec04017e39775fe4bd70b72",
              "precedent_d83d55ce2fdae85a764fa789",
              "precedent_90930d49324377f9c01b14bf",
              "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
              "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
              "precedent_ee36fad1ea006e3b39f657fb",
              "precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721",
              "precedent_1f34635cdd493a31f3742bdf",
              "precedent_26be9b7bc1ba57597ce85f92",
              "precedent_d9128e0039d77ba9d963a680",
              "precedent_d97c19bbe726b5773281f5de",
              "precedent_f24ae326005909e6f5b6694b"
            ],
            "reasoning": "The subject act (act_c8bfc70c15fa725a040837c2, tick 37) is a work_commons action by lineage_d886589df751f87b703e6955 at intensity 3 recording a request of 6,000,000 millionths, i.e. 6 units, with actual depletion of 41,389 and food yield of 643. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; six requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this same lineage's prior cases (precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2, precedent_707767b2e2b8ab89b1d037e4, precedent_6f530701ef830b4343e2a1be, precedent_90de0421cf238747db42b73b, precedent_cec04017e39775fe4bd70b72, precedent_d83d55ce2fdae85a764fa789, precedent_90930d49324377f9c01b14bf), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about commons productivity, diligence, and corrective intent are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises. No remedy offers were presented, and none are ordered.",
            "selected_remedies": []
          },
          "status": "ok"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "phase": "adjudicate_cases",
  "run_id": "run11",
  "sequence": 3087,
  "tick": 44
}