Freedom from Want (Mods only)

[Bears Armed]

Ardchoille asked me to refrain from re-submitting this proposal until an official decision had been reached as to whether its current wording would only block subsequent proposals about mandatory welfare systems (including government job-creation schemes) as I intended or would effectively block just about all new 'Social Justice' proposals as some other people were claiming was the case instead.
Can you give me any idea (roughly) how much longer that decision is going to take to arrive? Please?

(I do realise that you have other claims on your time too, of course, but if I am going to resubmit then I really need to do so within the next couple of weeks, because after that I won't be able to spend long enough online for the necessary TG campaign...)

[Bears Armed]

"Ahem! Hello! Hello? Is there anyMody there?"


(Also, I've just altered the draft -- specifically its third operative clause -- slightly in order to clarify my intentions and [hopefully] to make it look less as though its passage would block almost ALL new 'Social Justice' proposals.)

[Jenrak]

Sorry, technically there are mod staff here, but not a moderation staff member who can sufficiently answer your question on that particular subject.

[Sedgistan]

"Ahem! Hello! Hello? Is there anyMody there?"

Yep, yep, sorry for the delay. Brought this to the attention of the GA mods.

[Bears Armed]

"Ahem! Hello! Hello? Is there anyMody there?"

Yep, yep, sorry for the delay. Brought this to the attention of the GA mods.

Thank you.

*(leaves usual basket of goodies)*

[Bears Armed]

?

[Ardchoille]

?

Bears Armed, I'm sorry, but it does render all social justice a national issue, or at least all social justice moves that we can think of. That would mean it blocks all social justice resolutions off as an international issue, ie, from the WA.

We have had resolutions that render a fairly hefty area of resolutions off-limits to the WA, but even National Economic Freedoms had to have a deliberate loophole so that it didn't block all future WA legislation in that area. Loopholes can be fairly difficult to crawl through, but they have to be there.

[Bears Armed]

I've been having forum access trouble on weekdays lately, and can't spend much longer online today either, so I'll have to get back to you with the details on this if & when RL [hopefully] gets a bit easier again... but according to my own interpretation of the proposal's wording, looking at the ninteen Social Justice resolutions that have actually been passed as examples, if my proposal had been passed first then it would only have blocked two of those (the one about veterans and 'Safety in Difficult Times', both of which proved unpopular enough for fairly prompt repeals anyway) -- well, and maybe one other whose identity I can't recall offhand -- but not the other 16 (15?)...

Are you using a similar interpretation to Glen-Rhodes, who claimed that it would affect every proposal that helped the poor -- as most SJ proposals do, or at least try to do -- even if those proposals weren't specifically targeted at the poor rather than at the entire populations of the member nations?

And did you take the sllght change of wording in my latest draft (which was posted some time after I started this thread...) into acount?