I have a Blobber Quantity of five. My Thesis has not changed for a whole week after being set, which was shortly after the enactment of Theses Pieces. My Thesis has a hash of e3b0c44298fc1c149afbf4c8996fb92427ae41e4649b934ca495991b7852b855 which represents following outputs: Empty string from Angel’s Clover, Empty string from Angel’s Clover, Empty string from Angel’s Clover, Empty string from Angel’s Clover, Empty string from Angel’s Clover, and no salt, which put together gives a plaintext of an empty string. This has the same contents as my Blobber Imprints due to that also being blank.
On that basis, I declare victory.

Given that this declaration of victory is on the basis of the old version of Theses as described in the proposal Ninety-Five, I should probably point out how I’m able to use that version rather than the more complex version described in Theses Pieces. To put it simply, I assert that Theses Pieces did not overwrite the rule Theses and instead simply overwrote the text held in every Researcher’s Thesis.

My logic is as follows:
The proposal started with the line of text “Add a new rule called “Theses” to be the follow, or if such a rule already exists remove everyone’s Thesis, then update its text to be the following”.
The key part I’m going to look at is “update its text to be the following”. This commands the update of “its” text, but there’s two possible candidates for this update, both of which have text. There’s the rule “Theses”, and there’s everyone’s Thesis (which I’ll note is stated in the singular, not the plural).
For the purposes of argument, I’m going to replace “its” with both “the rule’s” and “the Thesis’” which gives two equally valid sentences.
“if such a rule already exists remove everyone’s Thesis, then update the rule’s text to be the following”
“if such a rule already exists remove everyone’s Thesis, then update the Thesis’ text to be the following”

Given that both are equally viable, my interpretation is to go for the more proximate object of the sentence rather than the other, therefore I have reverted the rules change that Theses Pieces applied, and I’ve instead applied it to every blank Thesis. Anyone who changed it after that rule was enacted has been considered to have overwritten it, which is a valid action in the both the older and the newer version of the rules.

As for any actions that would need to be rolled back as a result of this, I see none. Neither Josh nor myself have placed a hash into a tracked Thesis Hash field and instead have placed the hashes into the Thesis field which is only publicly tracked in the old versions of the rule. No other actions have otherwise been rendered illegal, as the only other action defined in the new version is Declare Dominion which has not yet been performed. Furthermore, there have been no proposals passed which alter or otherwise rely on the newer text of the rule.