Proposal: Opinion in both directions
(AI = 1.7, please)
Amend Rule 911 by replacing the definitions of REMAND and REASSIGN with
this text:
* REMAND, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the
appropriateness of the prior judgement; the prior question
is rendered open again; this judgement SHOULD be assigned
if the judge believes that the judge of the prior case will
make a better judgement if given a new opportunity
* REASSIGN, appropriate if there is serious doubt about the
appropriateness of the prior judgement, or if the prior judge
exhibited corruptive self-interest (material, with a specific
and obvious impact on eir judgement and arguments, and not
arising merely due to a difference of opinion or a wholly
incidental material benefit common among many players); the
judge of the prior case (if any) is recused, and the prior
question is rendered open again; this judgement SHOULD be
assigned if the judge believes that the judge of the prior
case will not make a better judgement if given a new
opportunity
