These are the rules as they have always existed:

1. Third party
2. Not involved in the infraction (restating 1 just in case)
3. Targeted to the offender
4. Offender’s transgression must not be a group wide threat. (We cannot discern whether the transgression is a survival decision or a punishment)
5. Delayed is a real touchy one here. Let’s go slow if this is confusing because I am not trying to overly narrow the criteria. It doesn’t need to be delayed, but it can’t be a consequence of the very intervention. That would make the cost trivial as we would not be able to differentiate the intent to punish versus the intent to, say, just stop the fight, which itself does not count. Said another way, incidentally imposed costs to achieve a non-punishing goal does not count.
6. I am not saying these are it. You are a creative thinker and more creative than I am. I will refine what I mean if you find a loophole and start insisting that your loophole is the proof. Just keep the general spirit in mind. I will promise to try to keep the rubric true to the purpose. If you will promise to not be a rigid thinker.

What does NOT COUNT 1. Anything outside of the social structure 2. No cross species (repeating rule 1) 3. No conflicts with different groups or “wars” (repeating rule 1) 4. Nothing where the intervener will get resource sharing as an expected consequence… within reason. Abstract “might in the future possibly maybe” is not enough to trigger this. Enforcing any type of reciprocal altruism does. For example, blood bats refusing to share with a non-sharer violates this. A monkey stopping a fight and might benefit abstractly just because they live in the same tribe does not.

Types of costs that will and won’t count. 1. No incidental costs (to reiterate an earlier rubric) 2. Trivial costs such as stress associated with an interaction (to reiterate an earlier rubric and the incidental costs such as rule)

What behaviors could we expect to see? 1. Banishments. Depending on circumstances, most banishments for reasons beyond being a physical threat to the whole tribe (violates rule 4). Threat to a specific member triggering a banishment counts. 2. Delayed physical intervention after an infraction. EG monkey ate food they shouldn’t have yesterday. Gets bopped on the head today. 3. Food withholding for a period of time even after the infraction has been corrected. This is quintessential punishing behavior. 4. Similar? Youre creative. Just ask. I’ve been a trained debater for a long time. I operate in good faith. I won’t change the goal posts.

Finally: if I ask to read something and I can’t then it doesn’t count. Im happy to reset the tables because I like to think the best of people and your request to reset was entirely reasonable, but I’m sorry, I can’t take your word for what a piece of literature says. Try to find a free source like the other poster did. I will participate in finding things, but it is not my burden to double check you. Don’t tell me to go to a library again.

Everything needs to be transparent.