On 5/30/08, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> None of the other offices have such powerful 'perks'. I think this is
> part of what makes CotC elections so hotly contested while other
> offices struggle to keep officers who can publish a regular report.
Despite Murphy's comment, I think t
BobTHJ wrote:
> None of the other offices have such powerful 'perks'. I think this is
> part of what makes CotC elections so hotly contested while other
> offices struggle to keep officers who can publish a regular report.
But how much of a perk is it, really? No process of judge selection
will
On Fri, 30 May 2008, Roger Hicks wrote:
> I don't know that disinterested judges are any less impartial, or that
> simply having interest in a case makes you biased. An interested judge
> is more likely to deliver a judgment which has been thought out and is
> far more likely to deliver it on time
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Perhaps a better method might be to have a two day window where any
>> potential judge can announce their interest in a case. Then the CotC
>> mak
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Roger Hicks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps a better method might be to have a two day window where any
> potential judge can announce their interest in a case. Then the CotC
> makes a random selection from among all interested judges?
I'd frankly prefer that
5 matches
Mail list logo
