On 4/8/2020 12:05 PM, Kerim Aydin via agora-official wrote: > R591 contains some guidance for what CAN and SHOULD be done following such > a judgement (though I don't know what that stray CAN is for wholly > unneeded for submitting a new case - maybe it allows a resubmitted case to > have the same number, I don't know). >
One reason I did this is I *am* truly interested in that R591 CAN. The rule text is: > A CFJ judged as INSUFFICIENT CAN and SHOULD be > submitted again with sufficient arguments/evidence. This is different than saying the CFJ *statement* SHOULD be resubmitted. If it said that, submitting the statement would create a new CFJ via R991 and the CAN would be unneeded. However, the text implies that the CFJ itself (along with all its history, properties, etc?) CAN be "submitted again". Is that something different? Maybe common sense will say no, it just means make a new CFJ by submitting the statement again (with more arguments), but I'm kinda curious. -G.
