On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Zefram wrote:
> Action: assigning an inappropriate judgement to the question on veracity
> in CFJ 1711
proto-judgement:
This is a very unfortunate case. I'm a very strong believer in "no
compulsion of judges." Incorrect judgement should be dealt with by
appeals, with the greatest punishment being the loss of a judicial
salary for a "wrong" opinion.
However, the continual use of the word "appropriate" is just too strong
to ignore or get around (using the SLR of 18-Oct, which looks to be the
most current at the time):
R2158/1: "A judge SHALL NOT assign an inappropriate judgement."
R591/20: "FALSE, appropriate if...", "TRUE, appropriate if..."
R911/16: "* OVERRULE with a valid replacement judgement for the prior
question, appropriate if the prior judgement was inappropriate
in the prior question and the replacement judgement is
appropriate for the prior question"
Since appeals are themselves non-appealable, an overrule officially
determines if a judgement was inappropriate at the time it was made,
and the SHALL NOT indicates that this violates the rule in question.
This is broken, but I must find GUILTY. [If anyone has a way out,
please suggest it]. I also submit the following [proto-proposal]:
----------------------------------------------------------------
No Judicial Compulsion
Amend Rule 2158 by replacing:
A judge SHALL NOT assign an
inappropriate judgement.
with:
A judge SHOULD NOT assign an
inappropriate judgement.
Any player found guilty of breaking Rule 2158 by assigning
an inapproprate judgement is hereby absolved from all punishment
(all punishment or need to complete sentences is hereby removed).
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-Goethe
