"a pledge to violate the judge's judicial duty" Did I do that? Sorry.
Obviously everyone should vote REMIT. On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Alex Smith <ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk> wrote: > I initiate the Agoran Decision to determine public confidence in the > judgement of CFJ 3537. (Some context: the text of the CFJ is "There is > currently more than one auction for Estates" and the CFJ refers to an > old scam by CuddleBeam. The history of the CFJ is really complex, and > hard to summarize, including many failed attempts to reconsider and/or > moot it, an attempt to retroactively unjudge the CFJ via ratification, > and a pledge to violate the judge's judicial duty. Also note that the > original judge is currently not a player.) > > For this decision, the vote collector is the Arbitor, and the valid > options are AFFIRM, REMAND, and REMIT (PRESENT is also a valid vote). > Quorum for this decision is 2. > > A reminder of the typical meanings of each option: > > AFFIRM: The judgement was broadly correct; > REMAND: The judgement should be reconsidered by the original judge to > contain more detail or reasoning behind the judgement, or to take into > account points not previously considered; > REMIT: The judgement was incorrect and should be tried again by a > different judge, or there are other extenuating circumstances which > require a different judge to take over the case. > > -- > ais523 > Arbitor -- >From V.J Rada
