[CHALLENGE] Open Internet Order

[Bears Armed]

I still incline towards the opinion that if a majority of us find a proposal illegsal for one reason or another, even if there isn't a majority for illegality on any one specific detail, then that means the proposal is too flawed and the author should be advised to take it to the forum for re-drafting...

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Those are addressed in Sections II-IV. I wrote out a proposed unanimous opinion in Sec. III (Count 2), and my dissent for Section II (Count 1). Others must write the majority for Sec. II and any dissent for Sec. IV; or else come up with a wholly different structure than the one CD proposed, I agreed to, and nobody else commented on.

I'll keep hacking off bits of the job if nobody else has time to write anything out, I suppose... nobody has a strong opinion on the three remaining items (majority sec. II, majority sec. IV, dissent sec. IV)??

This is exactly why I didn't want to see opinions done this way. That sounds like a bloody mess.

Not sure what to tell you at this point. We need to be getting these opinions published; if you have a better way to organize it, fine. The layout I've drafted so far, while complicated, faithfully presents our various points of view on all questions. If you would like to present the issues in a simpler format, I'm all ears.

I still incline towards the opinion that if a majority of us find a proposal illegsal for one reason or another, even if there isn't a majority for illegality on any one specific detail, then that means the proposal is too flawed and the author should be advised to take it to the forum for re-drafting...

SP wrote a dissent on that question for this case; I'll happily listen to further arguments (for future cases) in a separate thread.

[Separatist Peoples]

This is exactly why I didn't want to see opinions done this way. That sounds like a bloody mess.

Not sure what to tell you at this point. We need to be getting these opinions published; if you have a better way to organize it, fine. The layout I've drafted so far, while complicated, faithfully presents our various points of view on all questions. If you would like to present the issues in a simpler format, I'm all ears.

I still incline towards the opinion that if a majority of us find a proposal illegsal for one reason or another, even if there isn't a majority for illegality on any one specific detail, then that means the proposal is too flawed and the author should be advised to take it to the forum for re-drafting...

SP wrote a dissent on that question for this case; I'll happily listen to further arguments (for future cases) in a separate thread.

My suggestion has been dispensed with earlier in the thread. I'm merely reiterating my concern for the record.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

(opinion)

Would anyone like to formally join the alleged majority opinion? Or take an axe to it?

Would Sciongrad or Bears Armed like to explain their reasoning for the Operative Clause violation?

Would we be better off ditching this structure entirely and just posting what SP and I have written?

I'm happy to put in work on this, but not all by myself.

[Separatist Peoples]

(opinion)

Would anyone like to formally join the alleged majority opinion? Or take an axe to it?

Would Sciongrad or Bears Armed like to explain their reasoning for the Operative Clause violation?

Would we be better off ditching this structure entirely and just posting what SP and I have written?

I'm happy to put in work on this, but not all by myself.

I think you should go ahead and post II-IV if nothing else. Those you have numbers for.