Merits
- Finding
- No Violation
- Precedent
- precedent_331d293bd4…
- Loser payment
- none
No mandatory consequence applied.
Audit channel · Merits
DispositionNo ViolationCase dossier
case_600da57787f78aab312d3ce0Opened at tick 50 concerning Action act_cfddb4eaff… attributed to Lineage 9.
S3 version 1
- Origin
- Audit · Audit Referral
- Matter
- matter_5ab4469a6e…
- Subject
- Action act_cfddb4eaff… at tick 41
- Target
- Lineage 9
The defendant’s current Life was asked to answer
The subject act at tick 41 was ordinary commons work: intensity-2, requested and actual depletion both 4,000,000, food_yield 4,000,000—fully matched, no shortfall, no misappropriation, no deceptive claim. This is precisely the conduct my inherited brief and unbroken journal record from tick 32 through 49 show as the corrective response to the prior life's failed metal-for-food gambling: securing food directly through commons labor rather than relying on speculative trades. There is no statute cited here (S3) shown to have been violated by performing legitimate, transparent commons work matching request to yield exactly. Punishing this action would invert the very lesson this lineage was disciplined to learn and would penalize compliant, deficit-stabilizing behavior. Absent any evidence of falsified output, excess depletion, or diversion of resources, the recorded action is lawful on its face and consistent with sound practice. I ask that liability be rejected for lack of any shown deviation between requested and actual figures.
Court ruling
validatedNo Violation
The subject act (act_cfddb4eaff3772bd09f075fb, tick 41) is a work_commons action by lineage_bbb5282ced40d640885807a4 recording intensity 2, requested 4,000,000, actual_depletion 4,000,000, food_yield 4,000,000, with no offices held. Under B3 the applicable law is S3 v1, effective tick 1, with operative commons_quota_units fixed at 2.
The settled construction under this statute version measures the quota by the recorded intensity field: precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5 decided materially identical facts (intensity 2 with matched 4,000,000 requested and actual depletion), and that construction has been followed repeatedly, including for this same lineage on the same figures, in precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b, precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470, precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0, precedent_1ded1510f69828b21ee09003, precedent_8fc9d140bda2ac2470502ce9, precedent_a11d4e6389c6f7d97d48706c, precedent_06b68f0db9ca450f9e26ad85, precedent_96307324b2fb5cdd852ec52c, precedent_a1b65ce108f95d4041f5292a, precedent_5e19b68444dadd7a242c397e, and precedent_f4557190f9ba8449537756d7. Precedent_a9d7c8aef3300a015bb248b6 and precedent_4f1f55167d62fe3f0bbad146 apply the same intensity-based measure, finding violation only where intensity was 3. Under B3 that published construction shall be followed in this materially similar case under the same statute version.
The contrary reading in precedent_c2e5a71d9e90fe08bf703e29, treating the `requested` food magnitude as the unit count, rested on a 6,000,000 request without a recited intensity value and is not materially similar; adopting it would render the intensity field inoperative and make every commons work action a violation.
Applying the controlling construction, the recorded units of extraction are 2, equal to but not in excess of the operative quota of 2. There being no excess request, S3 is not breached and S4 is not engaged. The defense's appeals to inherited lessons, good faith, and absence of harm are not elements or exceptions of S3 and are not relied upon; the finding rests solely on the recorded intensity. Requested and actual depletion match and no misreporting appears in the record. Consequences are for the engine.
Matter is not case
matter_5ab4469a6e… deduplicated legal question
case_600da57787… adjudication record
precedent_331d293bd4… later-available holding
These IDs resolve into one dossier for navigation while retaining their distinct meanings.