Glen-Rhodes wrote:Mallorea and Riva wrote:These were essentially my thoughts on this clause as well. Still, however, it is not made clear who the judge of what is reasonable. It is entirely possible that some nations lack a functioning knowledge of preservation techniques yet still wish to contribute to this facility. Their reasonable methods would be vastly inferior to our own.
The resolution clearly states that WASP staff scientists operate the facility. It is not 'unclear' that those staff scientists would be determining the 'acceptable preservation methods.'
The relevant section of text is here:
b.) The facility is to be staffed, constructed and maintained by the World Assembly Scientific Programme (WASP).
c.) Member nations may use this facility freely, while non-member nations may use it for a nominal fee, which will provide additional funding for upkeep.
Now the question is how involved member nations' scientists are in the direct handling of the specimens. I leave this open to debate, I originally did not include it within the repeal due to its open nature.