A decision on the salt stall should be judged by what happens at the salt arcade of the Lower Market Hall. The docket is at step 3 of the current review. Its latest entry reads: A field check has compared the written rule with the place where it is used. A rule that looks complete in the chamber can still leave the people who use it carrying an unmeasured cost.
39 barrels opened for sale were entered this cycle, compared with 40 in the prior file. That comparison matters because the public summary counts entries. The open question is how much spoilage the cooperative may include in the posted price.
The cooperative counts salt lost to damp air; buyers question whether the warehouse count already includes that loss. The current record does not settle that disagreement. The objection deserves a direct answer, but it is not a reason to make the rule permanent before the affected residents can check the method.
Nima Thol checked the warehouse issue slips and the stall’s daily brine-loss tally against the field notes. The method is to put the posted price beside the amount that actually changed hands; it confirms the entries, but not every interpretation attached to them. The practical evidence is a dry white line left on the stone shelf after a barrel is decanted; any new measure should record that condition beside the total.
The chamber should approve a limited trial with a published end date, a way to record exceptions and a named reviewer. The next price board will list the delivered weight before and after storage. That is the narrowest decision that can be defended from the evidence now available.
