(See here for the Environmental discussion.)News wrote:There is a new category available to resolution authors named "Health," and the "Environmental" category has gained new options.
What does it do? Mostly, it's a way to make governments spend money on health and wellness (eg, "health" might be "research into a cancer cure", while "wellness" might be "fund a public service advertising campaign about sugary drinks"). Switching the burden to business is part of the Research subcategory.
INTERNATIONAL HEALTH CARE NOW! According to the techies, not really. Some proposals in the Healthcare subcategory might introduce some level of national health cover; most wouldn't. It's like Furtherment of Democracy, which doesn't get used to change whether your nation votes or holds elections, but might deal with how you vote, or how often you vote, in nations that vote at all.
The Dark Star Republic wrote:<snip> I struggle to see how "Bioethics" is not simply a more specific version of "Moral Decency" ...
Bioethics is very similar to MD, in that it restricts civil freedoms. The main difference I can see is that the restrictions can be for practical reasons as well as moral. For example, forbidding experimentation with @@virus that is incredibly easy to transmit@@ because of the risk of a pandemic; insisting that it be restricted to space-based laboratories ...
The Dark Star Republic wrote: ... and I'm curious about what this means for Social Justice resolutions with a healthcare component.
So am I. When I asked, "What happens with existing resolutions that could have been in 'Health'?", the techies said they'd like a neat list, please, identifying those resolutions.
The GA's help would be appreciated. Please post your suggestions, preferably with arguments on why and how it fits the new category, and I'll keep a running list of links in this post.
I'm not sure exactly what will happen. There was talk of switching categories. Whether, or how, they can do it still seems to be under discussion.
I'm aware that some GA authors take scrupulous care to fit their work to the category requirements. I don't know if refusal is an option, either, but if you don't want your work retro-fitted (not re-written, just category reassigned) this would be a good place to let us know. I can't guarantee anything, though.
Much of the work on this still has to be done by all of us, together. None of the GA mods had any real part in the development of the earlier new categories. We're feeling our way and some things can change if necessary.
F'rinstance, I'm already thinking of replacing the current Moby Dick reference with a simple "NO, you may not use this to establish a Universal Health Scheme". Possible reason: ideological ban. Thoughts?
Because of coding, the statistical changes that Resolutions in this category will create are set in stone. The name and basic description of the category -- Health: a resolution to modify universal standards of healthcare -- and the names of the subcategories are set in stone.
The mod-written descriptions of the sub-categories. like other such descriptions, waltz around the freedoms and other stats affected. I can't change the stats and I've been fairly straightforward about the way I've "Englished" them, but I'm open to suggestions there.
A lot of your queries may get the response, "I don't know, I'll ask." Some of them may get the reply, "This is a game, and games need unknowns, so I can't tell you that."
Whatever, have at it, gentlebeings.