Pavitra wrote: > I too recommend OVERRULE/FALSE, in part because the original judge says > so, and in part because if we don't use OVERRULE for cases like this, > where the correct answer is as trivial and obvious as it could > conceivably be, then why do we even have OVERRULE and AFFIRM as valid > judgements in the first place?
OVERRULE is most appropriate (in the ordinary-language sense) when, not only is the correct answer considered obvious, but the original judge is nevertheless not expected to get it right (e's either obstinate or has become inactive) - which is why e gets dinged. AFFIRM is somewhat similar in its effect on those who disagree with the judge, blocking em from further appeals.
