On Wed, 8 Apr 2020 at 15:28, Kerim Aydin via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> > 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. > It provides no mechanism, so I think all it would do would be to override something like a weekly limit on cases. -Alexis
