I always find it interesting how many different versions of the third ethic there are in circulation: in the manual Mollison has it as "setting limits to population and consumption," whilst Lawton prefers "return of surplus" and others, like yourself, seem to prefer "fair share." The difference may seem slight but I think it is a difference nonetheless: the first version seems to target both the "first" world for over-consumption and the "third" world for over-population; the second seems to imply that we have to work (to produce) first before we can share anything, and that we should only do so once we have catered to our own (basic) needs; the third, it seems to me, is much more vague and inline with current political and economical thinking. Personally, I prefer Geoff Lawton's version and can't help thinking that it is also the most in tune (if I have understood it correctly) with the spirit of Steemit. I wonder how you feel?!