W.O.M.B.A.T.S

[carolynwhite2]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Talisman" <talisman22457 at ...> 
wrote:
> 
> But this thread reflects some of my thought process in answering. 
>  
> For instance, in the Law section:
> 
> I'm not a big fan of the police state and it is not my first 
> instinct to run to the gendarmes or government officials to solve 
> problems with other people--especially family and neighbors.  
> 
> Is she looking for that sort of reasoning? Or just for someone who 
> can use deductive reasoning + canon knowledge to come to the 
*legal*  answer?
> 
> I wonder about her expectations regarding test-takers, her goals, 
> etc.
> 
> Because, if you answer by what you would actually do, you risk 
> seeming ignorant of the stated WW standards.  Especially if you are 
> me.
> 

Carolyn:
I was fascinated by this aspect as well. I decided in the end that 
her main objective was to fuel debate about the WW's constitution, 
legal system, morality etc, as there was not a canon-based right or 
wrong answer to quite a few of the questions. 

For instance, on enforcing WW law - as Harry's trial showed, Fudge 
was well out of order in calling the full Wizengamot to try even a 
genuine legal infringement of under-age magic, and a lot of people 
knew that even though they went along with it. So, do you answer 
similar sorts of questions assuming you are operating at a time of 
full-MoM panic, and rule by arbitrary dictat, or do you try and 
answer the question according to the normally more relaxed peacetime 
attitude of the average wizard-in-the-street?

Also, maybe because I'm currently immersed in a political history of 
Europe, in thinking about where you draw the line in calling in the 
cops eg to resolve domestic disputes, her questions made me think of 
the many and terrible intrusions into people's private lives that 
have happened in so many extreme left- and right-wing states. 

On the one hand, she has the amusing conundrum of whether it is right 
to turn your newly-married muggle husband into a coffee-table (and, 
um, it *is* a satisfying kind of idea!), but then asks not just 
whether a neighbour should inform on this, but which WW law had been 
transgressed..

I was vaguely cheered that she seemed to want to start such 
discussions, though my hopes will no doubt be dashed when she 
provides some kind of simplistic Janet & John set of answers.

Carolyn

PS Does anyone know how/when you get your score?