On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:43 PM Kerim Aydin <ke...@uw.edu> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 3:17 PM Aris Merchant > <thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Note that (probably) only the Referee can assign an ID number to this > > case. Under Rule 2246, "Submitting a CFJ to the Referee", "the Referee > > receives all obligations and powers for the specific case that the > > Arbitor would otherwise receive due to being Arbitor." I see no reason > > why that wouldn't include ID number assignment. I'd suggest that the > > best course of action is probably for the Arbitor to reserve a number > > and for the Referee to assign it. I believe the Referee is probably > > also required to write a mini-court gazette for the case, although > > that's arguable. In any case, I consider this a bug and a fix proposal > > is incoming. > > Well, ID Numbers for CFJs are 100% unofficial now, the rules don't > explicitly state that CFJs have ID numbers or how they're assigned, > though there's an ancillary mention of them in R2582. It might be an > interesting case to know if "all obligations and powers" include the > strongly historical but currently-unofficial customs of naming > rights....?
In either case, I'm officializing them in my proposal. Still, you're right that this is interesting, and I could see the precedent being potentially relevant in the future. I don't want to add to your overload right after you've taken on Arbitor though. Would you object to a CFJ? -Aris
