Moved from the PDC Thread
Frew, I think that you should take specific comments on that thread back to that thread. You could also join the group if you want to contribute. But for the sake of answering your concerns you raised in here, I will:
That seemed to be the only idea that everyone (including the women) agreed upon. There was some confusion on what “Affirmative Action” actually meant, but in the context of using Affirmative Action to discriminate against everyone else, there seemed to be a consensus on that. Again, I’m trying to built up the numbers significantly to hopefully include more women (and other diverse groups) to make sure that the group 100% takes the right line (and the right wording!) on it. Maybe we can use a different term than Affirmative Action to differentiate from the existing meaning which is not clear to mean the same thing for everyone involved (that is why I used the qualifier “while discriminating against everyone else”).
It’s not a weird personal pet project. There is more to the Working Group than just one topic and it’s a genuine issue that a lot of people care about. Even if the exact policy stays the same, the wording is terrible because it is unclear at conveying what we are really trying to do. It looks like (to the outside observer casually viewing our policies) that we are trying to replace Marriage with Civil Union to appease people who are against Marriage Equality by not calling it a marriage, because it would still exist in law under another name (“Civil Union”). Civil Unions are really offensive to people who want their Marriage to be called a Marriage.
If anything, the Video Gaming one could be considered a pet project, since I don’t have anyone else to work with me on that one yet.
In any case, these working groups that I’m heading wouldn’t put anything out if there isn’t broad support in the party on what we come up with, that would be ridiculous.