On Tue, 30 May 2017, Kerim Aydin wrote: > I'll let ais523 comment on whether the 2-day bit is a bother at all.
(final?) followup: I still disagree with the wide/narrow judging idea (both on the principle and as a 'too much work for officer' grounds). We purposefully built a lot of flexibility into the Arbitor's assignment method (saying "reasonably equal opportunities to judge" rather than mandating rotations, randomness, or anything else). omd and I actually had a contested election a couple years back with contrasting assignment policies. "Favoring" as used now is wholly Arbitor's discretion. Point being: this is the kind of thing an Arbitor should be able to form adaptive policies for or make an election matter, rather than mandating a switching system.
