Zaphod took a GNDT action of “Trading in 3I for 1R”. The rule for swapping resources says “At any time a Contractor may spend 3 different resources or 2 funds to gain 1 resource of any kind.”

My reading of that rule was that the Contractor would have to spend one each of three resources, and not three of one resource - otherwise why use the word “different”? Nobody would argue that “spend 3 resources” could be met by spending the self-same single unit of resource three times over.

Replace “may spend 3 different resources” with “may spend 3 different resources (i.e. one each of three resources which are different from each other)” and consider Zaphod’s action to have been taken - and illegal - under that new wording of the rule.