On 1/9/25 6:07 AM, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-talk wrote:
On Wed, 2025-01-08 at 16:56 -0500, Mischief via agora-talk wrote:
On 1/8/25 12:52 PM, Katherina Walshe-Grey via agora-talk wrote:
The above notwithstanding, it is IMPOSSIBLE to file a Motion to Reconsider a CFJ whose judgement has been entered into Moot, or that has already had a Motion to Reconsider filed against it by the same method since it was most recently assigned to a judge.
To be safe, maybe "most recent judgement" here too, in case a CFJ gets Mooted then reassigned.
That would be a change from how it currently works, which I think is correct? We don't want it to be possible to continuously file Motions to Reconsider; if there is still disagreement after reconsideration, that's precisely when a Moot is appropriate.
Here's the scenario I had in mind... - The original judge renders eir judgement - The judgement gets entered into Moot and reassigned - The new judge renders eir judgement The way I read the new language, the new judgement cannot be reconsidered by either method because the CFJ is a CFJ whose (previous) judgement has been entered into Moot. R911's current language refers to a *judgement* that has been entered into Moot, not "a CFJ whose judgement has been entered into Moot" -- that's why I suggested language to try to steer it back to the way the current wording works. It's also possible I'm reading it in a way that others wouldn't. It wouldn't be the first time. -- Mischief Collector, Illuminator, Prime Minister Hat: steampunk hat Vitality: alive Bang holdings: 2