Kerim Aydin wrote: > If the time period ends with no majority judgement, then: > - if the Justiciar has published an opinion on the case > clearly marked as the Justiciar's Opinion and indicating > a valid judgement, and that judgement is the same as > one given by at least one panel member (other than the > Justiciar), then the panel delivers that judgement;
7-man panel: REMAND REMAND REMAND REASSIGN REASSIGN OVERRULE -no judgment- the Justiciar picks OVERRULE, and that's the judgment. I think the following would be a better system: - If less than half the panel provided judgments, reassign it to a new panel containing all the panelists who did provide judgments, and have them reopine their previous opinions (in effect, reassign the previous panel) - If more than half the panel has provided judgments, and more than half the judging panelists provided the same judgment, that judgment is chosen. - Otherwise, the Justiciar (or, failing that, the CotC) shall choose a judgment such that if every undecided panelist chose that judgment, no other judgment would have been chosen more often (so in the above instance, e could pick REMAND or REASSIGN) I think the Hot-or-Cold thing should still exist under this system, but the case doesn't need to wait up for the Justiciar. Also, the CotC should get the first bid at the final say when the Justiciar is running the case.
