On Sun, 23 Oct 2016, Aris Merchant wrote: > (Blushes) Oops again. I checked the ADoP's report this time, honest, but I > think I miss-read it. Sorry. I'd thought it was... > Someone who hadn't been that active lately. Sorry, if I'd known it was you I > just would have left it. Just curious, why didn't > you assign it sooner? > -Aris
I hadn't had a little time to go back and look at the list of judges, because some of them from the last round of assignments judged slowly (or didn't judge at all, I need to re-assign at least one). When you directly expressed interest (and you don't have any conflict of interest that I can see), I knew I had a judge handy with an appreciation of the necessary speed :). By the way, if you find areana failed in eir duty, it's ok to extend your arguments to the further question of Alexis's scam versus my counter- scam. While you can't opine officially, if your arguments are persuasive, we've been known to accept "arguments beyond the specific brief" and not call the follow-up question separately. (of course someone may still call a follow-on case if they want to, but just saying it's not frowned-upon to exceed your brief on occasion in arguments and opine on such follow-up questions, especially if speed is an issue). -G.
