Unibot III wrote:Frankly, I think we should stop teaching newbies to not shoehorn. The best resolutions, in my opinion, deal with civil rights, or absolutely were shoehorned by any stretch of the imagination. Watch most veteran authors - the category is not the first thing they think of and it shouldn't be. Your first thought should be: what issue do I want to tackle? How do I want to tackle it? What do I need to do to make that possible?
The category system is there to box you in as an author - run circles around it, run circles around the rules, run circles around your opponents. That's what the World Assembly is about.
The category is not the first thing I think about when writing a resolution, but it's certainly an important consideration I have while writing. I don't know of any veteran authors that shoehorn. It is never a good idea to force a resolution into a category because a resolution written without a category in mind will almost always have components that may fit under several categories. For example, the recent Reproductive Rights proposal was written in such a way that some of its provisions did not fit under the selected category. This could have been resolved if the author wrote to the category in the first place.
You seem to be asserting that there's a correlation between resolution quality and selecting a category - in my opinion, there is not. Shoehorning, or not, the quality of the proposal is not affected, so asserting that all the good resolutions are shoehorned makes no sense. Unless you can demonstrate how, exactly, shoehorning makes a resolution better than others, I can't see any merit to your argument.