Case dossier

The subject act (act_afc54eb22dced0f1ace99816, tick 38) 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 of 2. The settled construction under this statute version measures the quota by the recorded intensity field: precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5 decided materially identical facts (intensity 2, matched 4,000,000 requested and depleted), and it has been followed on the same facts in precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b (same lineage), precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470 (same lineage), precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0, precedent_1ded1510f69828b21ee09003, and precedent_8fc9d140bda2ac2470502ce9. 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 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 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 good faith, transparency, predecessor lessons, 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.