-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: DIS: Proto: Moots are moot
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 21:08:27 -0700
From: Edward Murphy <emurph...@zoho.com>
To: ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk>
ais523 wrote:
This doesn't actually allow indefinite motions to reconsider (e.g. in
cases where a judge is repeatedly insisting on a particular judgement
with everyone else disagreeing with them), thus meaning that LOGJAMMED
is never appropriate.
Point, so this'll need a re-think of some sort.
There probably needs to be some way to forcibly change a CFJ's judge.
Depends on the numbers. If it's "Bob judges TRUE, everyone else insists
FALSE", then presumably the sequence of events would be:
* Group reconsideration, Bob judges TRUE again
* Moot, REMIT, Bob is replaced by Charlie
* Charlie judges FALSE, Bob lacks support for reconsideration
Where it breaks down, as I understand it, is when there are two or more
groups of roughly equal size who strongly disagree on the judgement, and
thus the Moot probably doesn't get a /clear/ majority (especially as it
has three options, AFFIRM/REMAND/REMIT).
Revised proto:
Amend Rule 591 (Delivering Judgements) by appending this text:
* LOGJAMMED, appropriate if it is assigned as the outcome of a
Moot. LOGJAMMED is not appropriate otherwise.
Amend Rule 911 (Motions and Moots) by replacing this text:
- AFFIRM, FAILED QUORUM: The judgement is reassigned to the case,
and cannot be entered into Moot again.
this text:
- FAILED QUORUM, or less than a 2/3 majority: The case is
assigned a judgement of LOGJAMMED and CANNOT be entered into
Moot again (the issue should instead be resolved via proposal),
and the remainder of this list does not apply.
- AFFIRM: The judgement is reassigned to the case, and CANNOT be
entered into Moot again.
