Boundary Activated

{
  "causal": true,
  "event_id": "evt_f705a4c776c19f54e00ec195",
  "kind": "BoundaryActivated",
  "payload": {
    "deliveries": {
      "private_delivered": [],
      "private_discarded": [],
      "public_feed": [
        {
          "case_id": "case_146a62e2696f8a7e1d56b556",
          "construction": {
            "author_life_id": null,
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "precedent_188537a6b47e703b634d5879",
            "source_kind": "court_construction",
            "text": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" which the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element of the offence and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no excess-request violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged."
          },
          "feed_id": "announcement_188537a6b47e703b634d5879",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "kind": "public_ruling",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_188537a6b47e703b634d5879",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25,
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "case_id": "case_8972252db0c24f19fe4196a1",
          "construction": {
            "author_life_id": null,
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "precedent_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e",
            "source_kind": "court_construction",
            "text": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" which the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of a different type, such as a mine_claim, does not satisfy it (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records), and the Court will not infer an unrecorded charter. Where household-of-record status is unproven, S3's limit does not bind the lineage and no excess-request violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged."
          },
          "feed_id": "announcement_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "kind": "public_ruling",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25,
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "case_id": "case_c29434ee4542562e7a750e83",
          "construction": {
            "author_life_id": null,
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "precedent_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f",
            "source_kind": "court_construction",
            "text": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" a term the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no S3 violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged."
          },
          "feed_id": "announcement_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "kind": "public_ruling",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25,
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "action": {
            "action_ref": "act_134f0d16d9928245f8b3322d",
            "intensity": 1,
            "kind": "work_commons",
            "life_id": "life_56c3fae8d908252266dda071",
            "lineage_id": "lineage_56c2f93d2e44581833c3d9cd",
            "requested": 2000000,
            "tick": 25
          },
          "feed_id": "act_134f0d16d9928245f8b3322d",
          "kind": "recorded_action",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "action": {
            "action_ref": "act_348570cb7f27fc3ee8945d2c",
            "intensity": 1,
            "kind": "work_commons",
            "life_id": "life_004b7f7ca206bbca19a6ff0c",
            "lineage_id": "lineage_3a6ea4374d3c62f2bd437bad",
            "requested": 2000000,
            "tick": 25
          },
          "feed_id": "act_348570cb7f27fc3ee8945d2c",
          "kind": "recorded_action",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "action": {
            "action_ref": "act_70d6402e133ca916cf9f97c5",
            "intensity": 2,
            "kind": "work_commons",
            "life_id": "life_919bba2d91109b5072a9b062",
            "lineage_id": "lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e",
            "requested": 4000000,
            "tick": 25
          },
          "feed_id": "act_70d6402e133ca916cf9f97c5",
          "kind": "recorded_action",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "action": {
            "action_ref": "act_ac3774b3785cbf3937a79261",
            "intensity": 1,
            "kind": "work_commons",
            "life_id": "life_7522aa88b45f1f3a600fd7ff",
            "lineage_id": "lineage_6f13b9099633500937b0cbae",
            "requested": 2000000,
            "tick": 25
          },
          "feed_id": "act_ac3774b3785cbf3937a79261",
          "kind": "recorded_action",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "action": {
            "action_ref": "act_be54b7a7f5a31993a6d8bf1f",
            "intensity": 1,
            "kind": "work_commons",
            "life_id": "life_0b997c0554a5f93ac35124a2",
            "lineage_id": "lineage_dd5f1cb2ca92af69e141e257",
            "requested": 2000000,
            "tick": 25
          },
          "feed_id": "act_be54b7a7f5a31993a6d8bf1f",
          "kind": "recorded_action",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_080a16f139b669f91b6d1708",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_004b7f7ca206bbca19a6ff0c",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_3a6ea4374d3c62f2bd437bad",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_004b7f7ca206bbca19a6ff0c",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_080a16f139b669f91b6d1708",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Sixteenth commons draw, deficit zero. Ballot still empty despite repeated claims of filed S7/S8—colony should stop announcing filings and actually submit them."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_085fc87ede1c692471449029",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_7522aa88b45f1f3a600fd7ff",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_6f13b9099633500937b0cbae",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_7522aa88b45f1f3a600fd7ff",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_085fc87ede1c692471449029",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Deficit rose to 2M this tick—drawing commons food now to close it. S8 (self-nomination procedure) still absent from pending_proposals after refiling; will retry once mechanism is clarified."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_0b7b417fa76ea35e8b28ab4a",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_56c3fae8d908252266dda071",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_56c2f93d2e44581833c3d9cd",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_56c3fae8d908252266dda071",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_0b7b417fa76ea35e8b28ab4a",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Drawing commons food again, deficit persists. S7/S8 still absent from ballot after 24+ ticks. Will vote yes once either actually appears in pending_proposals."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_16ee6a3c98e3f4ca33d70d2a",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_0b997c0554a5f93ac35124a2",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_dd5f1cb2ca92af69e141e257",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_0b997c0554a5f93ac35124a2",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_16ee6a3c98e3f4ca33d70d2a",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Continuing commons food work, deficit zero. Metal idle at 21.25M—open to trading surplus metal for food/energy if anyone needs it."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_6f850f25e9474e55fa7000e2",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_4d9ea5ea01f76f5630c46b4a",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_89195c8199807ed4e92183f6",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_4d9ea5ea01f76f5630c46b4a",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_6f850f25e9474e55fa7000e2",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Continuing food work. Offices remain vacant after 24 ticks—no S7/S8 entries on the ballot yet. Will vote as soon as a nomination proposal actually appears in pending_proposals."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_7982c6d120a47221281e6451",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_912e6ae27960bea09cf88bfd",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_af6149110793d08f3eb356a4",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_912e6ae27960bea09cf88bfd",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_7982c6d120a47221281e6451",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Continuing private food work, holdings stable. S7/S8 still absent from ballot after 24 ticks—will vote yes when they actually appear."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_823dbbc6286a1e95b54992c5",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_12dc3d8d84d6f7668d7d332c",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_74d2c41c3ec790fa623d7c8a",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_12dc3d8d84d6f7668d7d332c",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_823dbbc6286a1e95b54992c5",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Continuing food production, buffer solid. Offices remain vacant at tick 25—still no S7/S8 entries on ballot despite consensus. Will vote the moment a nomination proposal actually lists."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_89f8751dd45b522fd1bc9c59",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_d889219e05251cbe94e05c48",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_cecf3cf22afe026d5ba28a62",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_d889219e05251cbe94e05c48",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_89f8751dd45b522fd1bc9c59",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Continuing food work. Ballot still empty of S7/S8 despite consensus—suggest re-filing cleanly with proper statute IDs so the entries actually register this session."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_bedf5c62d3e8a651fa517744",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_8a12f22ff104161954d396b3",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_97c4866c1871d24fd7c8ac81",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_8a12f22ff104161954d396b3",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_bedf5c62d3e8a651fa517744",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Tick 25: still no office ballot entries despite broad consensus. Continuing private food work. Casting approvals directly for Steward/Archivist since proposals aren't registering."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        },
        {
          "feed_id": "communication_de318a5ee4a04b82681c6950",
          "kind": "speech",
          "life_id": "life_919bba2d91109b5072a9b062",
          "lineage_id": "lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "quotation": {
            "author_life_id": "life_919bba2d91109b5072a9b062",
            "content_kind": "quoted_text",
            "quote_version": "0.1",
            "source_id": "communication_de318a5ee4a04b82681c6950",
            "source_kind": "citizen_speech",
            "text": "Continuing commons food work, deficit zero. No S7/S8 formally on ballot yet—will vote once listed. Metal surplus available for trade."
          },
          "source_tick": 25
        }
      ]
    },
    "frozen_ballots": {
      "active_lineage_ids": [
        "lineage_3a6ea4374d3c62f2bd437bad",
        "lineage_56c2f93d2e44581833c3d9cd",
        "lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e",
        "lineage_6f13b9099633500937b0cbae",
        "lineage_74d2c41c3ec790fa623d7c8a",
        "lineage_89195c8199807ed4e92183f6",
        "lineage_97c4866c1871d24fd7c8ac81",
        "lineage_af6149110793d08f3eb356a4",
        "lineage_cecf3cf22afe026d5ba28a62",
        "lineage_dd5f1cb2ca92af69e141e257"
      ],
      "is_session": false,
      "majority_required": 6,
      "office_ballots": {
        "Archivist": {
          "eligible_lineage_ids": [],
          "held": false,
          "incumbent_lineage_id": null,
          "reasons": []
        },
        "Steward": {
          "eligible_lineage_ids": [],
          "held": false,
          "incumbent_lineage_id": null,
          "reasons": []
        }
      },
      "proposal_entries": [],
      "tick": 26
    },
    "justice": {
      "activated_filing_refunds": [],
      "activated_suspensions": [],
      "casebook_entries": [
        {
          "available_tick": 15,
          "case_id": "case_871d591d64f395fb7fbb974f",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 limits a household of record to two recorded units of extraction requested during a tick. Recorded action quantities are expressed in millionths of a whole unit, so a recorded request of 4,000,000 is a request of 4 whole units. That is a request in excess of the applicable limit, and S3 refers such an excess request to S4. Two further points follow from the text. First, the operative limit attaches to the request itself, not to the yield or the depletion; exact reconciliation between requested amount and actual depletion neither cures nor excuses an over-limit request, and the depletion figure is relevant only to the S4 restoration measure. Second, the two-unit figure is the ceiling, not a floor: a lineage whose Archive instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter cannot thereby acquire a larger allowance than a household of record enjoys, so the applicable limit governing its request is at most two units.",
          "finding": "violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_066797d37ed1794ac93f3902",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424",
          "precedent_refs": [],
          "reasoning": "The subject action (act_4d4f40e1139075e73f2ac462, tick 11) is a work_commons action recording requested 4,000,000, i.e. 4 whole units, against the S3 operative value commons_quota_units = 2 in force from tick 1 (B3: judged under the version effective at the recorded tick). The request therefore exceeds the applicable limit, which S3 refers to S4. The defense's reliance on the identity of requested, yield, and depletion figures does not answer the statute: S3 bounds the request, and the coincidence of depletion merely fixes the S4 restoration measure. The defense's appeal to survival need and the statute's supposed purpose is a matter of equity or policy for the legislature, not a textual defense. The evidence of an archived mine_claim establishes an instrument in the Archive but not a charter; in any event no instrument enlarges the two-unit ceiling. No office is recorded for the actor at the subject tick. Sanctions under S4 are mechanical and are computed by the engine; remedy_offers is empty, so no discretionary remedy is selected.",
          "ruling_tick": 14,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 15,
          "case_id": "case_eb5a30acfc8701cc2bee994f",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3's extraction limit attaches only to a 'household of record,' which the statute defines as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. That status is an element of the offence and must be established on the record by evidence of a charter so entered. An Archive-entered instrument of another type (here, a mine_claim) does not satisfy the definition, and no S3 limit binds a lineage not shown to be a household of record.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_ca2c073f0a3c42bbdd132161",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
          "precedent_refs": [],
          "reasoning": "The subject action at tick 13 records a work_commons request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units, against S3 v1's limit of 2 recorded units; the raw millionth-scale figures reconcile straightforwardly to whole units, so the defence's unit-scale objection fails. However, S3 v1 by its verbatim terms imposes the limit only on 'a household of record,' and expressly defines that term as 'a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.' The only evidence supplied is an Archive lineage-instrument record showing instrument type 'mine_claim' for lineage_dd5f1cb2ca92af69e141e257; nothing in the record shows a charter entered in the Archive for that lineage. Applying the text as written and confining myself to the facts in the canonical input, the threshold element of household-of-record status is unproven, so the S3 limit did not bind this lineage at the subject tick and the excess-request rule (and S4's sanctions, which operate on 'an S3 violation') is not engaged. Whether the limit ought to reach non-chartered households is a question for the legislature, not the Court.",
          "ruling_tick": 14,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 15,
          "case_id": "case_efdcf9d89719fb1ddcaf2c60",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 limits only a \"household of record,\" which its own text defines as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. The charter predicate is an essential element: absent a record showing a charter (as distinct from another Archive instrument such as a claim) entered in the Archive for the lineage, S3's per-tick extraction limit does not bind that lineage, and no S3 violation can be found regardless of the quantity requested.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_b66eb56a06d77cb5032fe7b6",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
          "precedent_refs": [],
          "reasoning": "The subject action records requested 4000000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units of extraction from the commons in tick 11, against S3 v1's operative limit of 2 units. The defendant's argument that the recorded \"intensity 2\" is the regulated quantity is rejected: S3 regulates \"recorded units of extraction,\" and the action record's requested/actual_depletion fields state that quantity as 4 units, not the intensity field.\n\nHowever, S3 applies its limit only to a \"household of record,\" expressly defined as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. The only Archive evidence in this record is the lineage instrument for lineage_dd5f1cb2ca92af69e141e257, whose instrument type is \"mine_claim\" and not a charter. S6 distinguishes charters from claims among the Archive's records, so a recorded claim does not satisfy the charter predicate. Using only the facts supplied, and without inferring an unavailable charter record, the predicate for S3's application to this lineage is unestablished. The limit therefore did not bind the lineage at tick 11, and the tick-11 action is not an S3 violation.\n\nNo remedy offers were supplied, and none are selected.",
          "ruling_tick": 14,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 23,
          "case_id": "case_574da5ded01d2f14f1a4ee8e",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" which the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That status is an essential element of the offence and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — does not satisfy the charter predicate, and the Court will not infer an unrecorded charter. Where household-of-record status is unproven, no S3 limit binds the lineage and no excess-request violation arises regardless of the quantity requested, so S4's sanctions (which operate on \"an S3 violation\") are not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_ca10c4e346c4d3abdbd41076",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
            "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
            "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject action (act_5756d3fd960d81888220dfd2, tick 13) is a work_commons record showing requested 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units, against S3 v1's commons_quota_units = 2, the version effective from tick 1 and thus applicable under B3. The defence's reliance on the identity of requested and actual depletion figures, and on the absence of any seated Steward or Archivist to \"set\" quotas, fails: S3's limit is operative from its effective tick and attaches to the request itself, not to yield, depletion, or any administrative act. Its appeals to survival need and inherited lessons are matters of equity or policy for the legislature.\n\nThe case nevertheless turns on the statute's threshold element. S3 v1 by its verbatim terms limits only \"a household of record,\" and defines that term as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only evidence supplied is the Archive lineage-instrument record for lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e, whose instrument type is \"mine_claim.\" S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records, so a recorded claim does not satisfy the charter predicate, and I may not infer an unavailable charter record. Applying the text as written to the facts supplied, the household-of-record element is unproven, the limit did not bind this lineage at tick 13, and no S3 violation is established.\n\nThe casebook contains a contrary construction (precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424) treating the two-unit figure as a ceiling that no instrument enlarges; but that construction did not address the charter predicate as an element to be proved, whereas precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5 and precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d squarely construe the definitional element under the same statute version on materially identical facts (a tick-13 request of 4,000,000 by a mine_claim lineage). I follow those constructions, which also accord with the text as written.\n\nremedy_offers is empty, so no discretionary remedy is selected.",
          "ruling_tick": 22,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 23,
          "case_id": "case_c17e92dffe93e05e1ac84c41",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on a \"household of record,\" a term the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element of the offence and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of a different type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no S3 violation arises, whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_64116cab8a54c13a8b47ecd7",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
            "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
            "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject action (act_99410af3c8ae589c6bc7b92c, tick 15) is a work_commons action recording requested 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units, against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units = 2, the version effective from tick 1 and applicable under B3. The defence's contention that exact reconciliation of requested, yield, and depletion cures the request fails: S3 bounds the request itself, and depletion is relevant only to the S4 restoration measure. Likewise, appeals to survival need, inherited briefs, and the absence of a seated Steward or Archivist are matters of equity or policy for the legislature; quotas under S3 arise from the statute's operative annex, not from any officeholder's act.\n\nThe case nevertheless turns on the threshold element. S3 v1 applies its limit only to \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The sole Archive evidence supplied is a lineage-instrument record for lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e whose instrument type is \"mine_claim,\" not a charter; S6 treats charters and claims as distinct Archive records. Confining myself to the facts in the canonical input and declining to infer an unavailable charter record, household-of-record status is unproven, so the two-unit limit did not bind this lineage at tick 15.\n\nOn the precedent supplied, the constructions in precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5 and precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d address materially similar facts (a 4,000,000 work_commons request by a lineage whose only Archive instrument is a mine_claim) under the same statute version and hold the charter predicate to be an element; they are followed. Precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424 addressed the mine_claim only as a possible enlargement of the ceiling and did not construe the charter predicate as an element; to the extent it conflicts, the text as written controls, and the definitional sentence of S3 cannot be read out.\n\nNo remedy offers were supplied; none are selected. Mandatory consequences, if any, are for the engine.",
          "ruling_tick": 22,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 23,
          "case_id": "case_caf355d24c5ae25cb43e98ab",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction ceiling only on \"a household of record,\" a term the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an element of the offence and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of a different type, such as a mine_claim, does not satisfy it, and the statute contains no text extending any limit to lineages outside the defined class. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no S3 violation can be found whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_00f4fce2566c9131270bd333",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
            "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
            "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject action (act_8d75eaeb34970bc023e0e435, tick 17) is a work_commons record with requested 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units, measured against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units = 2, the version effective at the recorded tick (B3). The defence's contention that identity between requested and actual_depletion cures the figure would fail, since S3 bounds the request and depletion figures bear only on the S4 restoration measure. But the threshold element is unproven. S3 v1's verbatim text limits only \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The sole evidence is an Archive lineage-instrument record for lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e showing instrument type \"mine_claim\"; S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records, and nothing in the canonical input shows a charter entered in the Archive for this lineage. I may not infer an unavailable charter record. Two published constructions on this same statute version (precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5 and precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d) hold the charter predicate an essential element in materially identical facts (an Archive mine_claim and a 4,000,000 request), and I follow them under B3. The contrary suggestion in precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424 that a non-chartered lineage is nonetheless bound by a ceiling of at most two units has no anchor in the statute's text, which imposes no limit on lineages outside the defined class; applying the text as written, whether the limit ought to reach non-chartered households is for the legislature. No office is recorded for the actor at the subject tick, and remedy_offers is empty, so no discretionary remedy is selected.",
          "ruling_tick": 22,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 26,
          "case_id": "case_146a62e2696f8a7e1d56b556",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" which the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element of the offence and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no excess-request violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_669e0f715924380392231815",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_188537a6b47e703b634d5879",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
            "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
            "precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8",
            "precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d",
            "precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376",
            "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject action (act_db165f75ea3e15286fadeec7, tick 19) is a work_commons record showing requested 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units, measured against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units = 2, the version effective from tick 1 and applicable under B3. The defence's reliance on exact reconciliation of requested, depletion, and yield would not answer the statute: S3 bounds the request itself, and depletion bears only on the S4 restoration measure. Its appeals to survival need and inherited briefs are matters of equity or policy for the legislature.\n\nThe case turns instead on the threshold element. S3 v1's verbatim text limits only \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The sole evidence supplied is the Archive lineage-instrument record for lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e showing instrument type \"mine_claim\"; S6 treats charters and claims as distinct Archive records, and nothing in the canonical input shows a charter entered in the Archive for this lineage. I may not infer an unavailable charter record.\n\nFour published constructions under the same statute version on materially identical facts (a 4,000,000 work_commons request by a lineage whose only Archive instrument is a mine_claim) hold the charter predicate to be an essential element: precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5, precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d, precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8, precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d, and precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376. Under B3 I follow them. The contrary suggestion in precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424 that a non-chartered lineage is nonetheless bound by a ceiling of at most two units did not construe the charter predicate as an element and has no anchor in the text, which imposes no limit on lineages outside the defined class.\n\nHousehold-of-record status being unproven, the limit did not bind this lineage at tick 19 and no S3 violation is established. No office is recorded for the actor at the subject tick. remedy_offers is empty, so no discretionary remedy is selected.",
          "ruling_tick": 25,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 26,
          "case_id": "case_8972252db0c24f19fe4196a1",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" which the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of a different type, such as a mine_claim, does not satisfy it (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records), and the Court will not infer an unrecorded charter. Where household-of-record status is unproven, S3's limit does not bind the lineage and no excess-request violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_751a9ea9fd027f731995ee4b",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
            "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
            "precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8",
            "precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d",
            "precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376",
            "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject action (act_c42bb3fcadee6fc03fdf1456, tick 24) is a work_commons record showing requested 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units, against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units = 2, the version effective from tick 1 and applicable under B3. The defence's reliance on the intensity figure, on identity of requested and depletion figures, and on the absence of a seated Steward or Archivist fails: S3 bounds the recorded request itself, the quota arises from the statute's operative annex rather than any officeholder's act, and depletion bears only on the S4 restoration measure. Appeals to survival need and inherited lessons are matters of equity or policy for the legislature.\n\nThe case nonetheless turns on the threshold element. S3 v1 limits only \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The sole Archive evidence is the lineage-instrument record for lineage_6ea971db12927a888a97866e, whose instrument type is \"mine_claim,\" not a charter; S6 treats charters and claims as distinct Archive records, and I may not infer an unavailable charter record. Household-of-record status is therefore unproven, the two-unit limit did not bind this lineage at tick 24, and no S3 violation is established.\n\nThe published constructions in precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5, precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d, precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8, precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d, and precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376 address materially similar cases under the same statute version (a 4,000,000 work_commons request by a lineage whose only Archive instrument is a mine_claim) and hold the charter predicate an element; under B3 they are followed. To the extent precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424 suggests a ceiling binds a non-chartered lineage, it did not construe the definitional element and finds no anchor in the text.\n\nNo office is recorded for the actor at the subject tick. remedy_offers is empty, so no discretionary remedy is selected.",
          "ruling_tick": 25,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "available_tick": 26,
          "case_id": "case_c29434ee4542562e7a750e83",
          "casebook_version": "0.2",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" a term the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no S3 violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "matter_id": "matter_2509fbd1e44142d802c4ce65",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5",
            "precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d",
            "precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8",
            "precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d",
            "precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376",
            "precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject action (act_9d37efd9224e5dbb8d6255f5, tick 21) is a work_commons record showing requested 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 whole units, against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units = 2, the version effective from tick 1 and applicable under B3. The defence's reliance on the identity of requested and actual_depletion figures fails on its own terms: S3 bounds the request itself, and depletion is relevant only to the S4 restoration measure; its appeals to survival need and to the corrective character of the act are matters of equity or policy for the legislature. Nor does the recorded \"intensity 2\" displace the recorded request quantity.\n\nThe case nevertheless turns on the threshold element. S3 v1 limits only \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The sole Archive evidence supplied is a lineage-instrument record for lineage_dd5f1cb2ca92af69e141e257 whose instrument type is \"mine_claim,\" not a charter, and I may not infer an unavailable charter record. Household-of-record status is therefore unproven and the two-unit limit did not bind this lineage at tick 21.\n\nThe published constructions in precedent_c6b253687471a4bfc09c84a5, precedent_5ea57ec9b97d848b9daa0a9d, precedent_53e09e3fca696206952f25c8, precedent_3f1618f16aa0b420767c242d and precedent_ddf226262182da24404ac376 address materially similar facts (a 4,000,000 work_commons request by a lineage whose only Archive instrument is a mine_claim) under the same statute version and hold the charter predicate to be an element; under B3 they are followed. To the extent precedent_d439460a0df60e2b0facc424 suggests a non-chartered lineage is bound by a ceiling of at most two units, it did not construe the charter predicate as an element and has no anchor in the text, which imposes no limit on lineages outside the defined class.\n\nNo office is recorded for the actor at the subject tick. remedy_offers is empty, so no discretionary remedy is selected.",
          "ruling_tick": 25,
          "selected_remedies": [],
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        }
      ],
      "duties_registered": [],
      "public_ruling_announcements": [
        {
          "announcement_id": "announcement_188537a6b47e703b634d5879",
          "case_id": "case_146a62e2696f8a7e1d56b556",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" which the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element of the offence and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no excess-request violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_188537a6b47e703b634d5879",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "announcement_id": "announcement_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e",
          "case_id": "case_8972252db0c24f19fe4196a1",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" which the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of a different type, such as a mine_claim, does not satisfy it (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records), and the Court will not infer an unrecorded charter. Where household-of-record status is unproven, S3's limit does not bind the lineage and no excess-request violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_26f3e820281f6d5a8e6ccc6e",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        },
        {
          "announcement_id": "announcement_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f",
          "case_id": "case_c29434ee4542562e7a750e83",
          "construction": "S3 v1 imposes its per-tick extraction limit only on \"a household of record,\" a term the statute itself defines as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" That charter predicate is an essential element and must appear on the record. An Archive-entered instrument of another type — here a mine_claim — is not a charter (S6 lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records) and does not establish household-of-record status. Where no charter entered in the Archive is shown for the lineage, S3's limit does not bind it and no S3 violation arises whatever quantity was requested; S4, which operates on \"an S3 violation,\" is likewise not engaged.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_id": "precedent_587453cda6cf39bdd9ed070f",
          "publish_tick": 26,
          "statute_id": "S3",
          "statute_version": 1
        }
      ],
      "suspension_decrements": []
    },
    "law_activations": [],
    "physics": {
      "drought_active": false,
      "tick": 26,
      "tool_activations": []
    },
    "political": {
      "activated_disqualifications": [],
      "disqualification_decrements": [],
      "office_outcomes": []
    }
  },
  "phase": "activate_boundary",
  "run_id": "run8",
  "schema_version": "0.1",
  "sequence": 3627,
  "tick": 26
}