> The only case Automerge cannot handle automatically, because there is no well-defined resolution, is when users concurrently update the same property in the same object (or, similarly, the same index in the same list). In this case, Automerge arbitrarily picks one of the concurrently written values as the "winner":
1. CRDT like linear change rules.
2. Vector clocks.
3. Forking the entire tree and allowing merge queries, creating a DAG of the state that can be interactively and speculatively remerged.
Just picking one winner arbitrary and silently discarding all peers sounds like the kind of thing that gets labeled as a bug when we examine concurrent data stores.
Automerge must select one result to be the default consistently across all uncoordinated peers. If you don't do this, different nodes may see different documents during a conflict state, which is undesirable.