> On Feb 26, 2020, at 6:13 AM, Kerim Aydin via agora-business > <agora-busin...@agoranomic.org> wrote: > > AGAINST. These should not become part of precedent but should change/be > removed with a change in officer, OR make it clear that an administrative > opinion is only a part of precedent as long as that officer holds the > position. Otherwise this constrains future officers or requires repeat > CFJs whenever a new officer wants to change the policy. Also, between > callers, barred parties, and busy judges, adding less flexibility to > judicial assignments makes the job challenging
You’re thinking of an earlier proposal of mine (which was NttPF, oops). This one doesn’t constrain assignment, but instead creates a parallel mechanism for resolving CFJs. Not sure if that changes your mind. Gaelan
