2008/4/24 Nathan nawrich@gmail.com:
Are you criticizing the level of the language used, then? I don't see a problem with it. Most editors on the English Wikipedia read and write in fluent, high level English. This is an interesting proposal that could work out quite well. Sort of a Catch-22 though - if it passes, it proves itself wrong. If its correct that serious internal policy change has become impossible, then the body will never be formed.
Nathan
I neither see it as "high level" English nor academic English. It certainly isn't the kind of English that should be used on any space in Wikipedia. It presumes an understanding of a legal system and If I am very wrong (a) the phrasing is incorrect and (b) Wikipedia has never set itself out to be conditioned by (i) democracy (ii)wiki-law and wiki-lawers.
dunno it all seems wrong
mike