Questions in the Fifth Book of Talmudic Logic

Hello Rabbi Michi,
1. In the ninth chapter regarding postponement and advancement between mitzvot, on page 227 in the paragraph “Considerations of Transitivity” it is written: We will examine the words of the Rabbi… (applying the rule of the Megillah > work only for the matter of advancement, but for the matter of postponement, work precedes. The rest of the rules remain as usual) we will obtain the following results regarding postponement:
A. Work > Megillah (reversal of rule 1 according to the Ran)
B. Megillah> T.T. (College 2)
C. Tel.> Work (from the reason for rule 2)
I didn’t understand Rule 3, because at the beginning of the chapter you formulated the reasoning for Rule 2 as follows: Serious work is rejected by the Megillah, and in the 27th chapter it is rejected by the Megillah. In the 28th chapter it is rejected by the Megillah.
And later it was brought up that: Met Mitzvah>Megila>Avodah>Tat Deyikhid. And Tat Derevim somewhere before Avodah. But if in rules A, B, C it is about Tat Derevim, how did you determine that it is lower than Megila? (And this cannot be proven from the action of the House of Rabbis who canceled Tat because of Megila, because the Rabbis in the second chapter of the book write that Tat Derevim is the Tat of all Israel, like the time of Joshua. According to the House of Rabbis)
2. On page 198, i.e. conditional divorce, (Reuven divorced his wife so that she would marry Shimon, and she went and married Levi, and later she left Levi without a get and married Shimon) your conclusion, based on the principle of consistency, is that she remains married to Reuven. But why not say that she is still married to Shimon? After all, it is still possible that he will divorce her in the future and then she will legally marry Levi, and the divorce from Reuven will take place.