blanchet [Tue, 03 May 2011 14:23:40 +0200] rev 42650
reintroduce this idea of running "metisFT" after a failed "metis" -- I took it out in e85ce10cef1a because I couldn't think of a reasonable use case, but now that ATPs use sound encodings and include dangerous facts (e.g. True_or_False) it makes more sense than ever to run "metisFT" after "metis"