Case dossier

The subject act (act_ca9857d63f0471c9567dacb6, tick 37) is a work_commons action by lineage_b6d91541e2c6bcd46a706c70 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 of 2. The settled construction under this statute version measures the quota by the recorded intensity field: precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5 on materially identical facts (intensity 2, 4,000,000 requested and depleted), followed by precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b, precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470, and precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0. Precedent_a9d7c8aef3300a015bb248b6 adopts the same measure, finding violation only because intensity there was 3. Under B3 that construction shall be followed in this materially similar case. The contrary reading in precedent_c2e5a71d9e90fe08bf703e29, treating the `requested` food magnitude as the unit count, rested on a record of 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 extraction units 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 points about motive, transparency, predecessor lessons, and absence of harm are immaterial to S3, which is breached by the request alone; the finding rests solely on the recorded intensity. Consequences are for the engine.