Rewarding
Synod Judgement
Overview
The General Assembly of the Imperial Synod controls the Virtue Fund - a pool of money endowed to the Synod so that they may directly reward virtuous behaviour. The mainstay of the fund usually comes from the auction of a dose of true liao but it is supplemented with donations of Imperial currency from wealthy citizens who wish to use the benefits of their prosperity to encourage virtue.
In Autumn 383YE, the Senate determined that the dose of true liao provided by the Lepidean University would be distributed by the Synod through the judgement of Rewarding. This lead to some additional guidance issued by the Constitutional Court as to how competing judgements would be handled.
Judgement
Any member of the Synod may submit a judgement of rewarding for consideration by the General Assembly. The judgement must specify a single individual who will receive the reward and must state the size of the proposed reward (or that the reward will be the dose of true liao provided by the Lepidean University). It is not possible to reward a band or group - but it is possible to proclaim the virtue of a group of characters and then name the individual who will be rewarded accordingly.
A judgement of rewarding requires a lesser majority to pass.
Better to earn a ring than be given a crown
Marcher ProverbOutcome
If the judgement is successful, then the Tribune will arrange for the money (or true liao) to be deducted from the Virtue Fund and given to the priest who raised the judgement to apportion.
It is common for individuals to ask for money from the Virtue Fund for a specific goal. It is perfectly acceptable to reference the goal in the judgement of rewarding, but this is not legally binding. On receipt of the funds, they become the legal property of the recipient who may dispose of them as they choose.
It is not possible for the Virtue Fund to go into debt. If a reward judgement is upheld but there is not enough in the Virtue Fund for when the judgement's scrutiny ends, then the entirety of the current fund is paid to the priest who raised the judgement, but the priest cannot collect the remainder later. This is noted on the judgement. If the Virtue Fund is empty, the judgement can still pass, but the recipient receives no money.
If multiple rewards are upheld at the same time then allocation is made beginning with the judgement that has passed with the greatest margin, and continuing in order to the judgement with the smallest margin. In the event of two mandates having the same margin of error and there being insufficient funds remaining to support either, then the remaining money is split equally between the two judgements. In the case of true liao if there is not enough to divide it equally, none of the remaining judgements receive the reward.
It is not possible for a judgement to specify that a reward be made at some future time beyond the close of scrutiny. Any money to be granted from the Virtue Fund must be issued at the time the judgement passes.
Further Reading
Core Brief
Additional Information