[pp.int.general] Pirate Manifesto: status of internal ballots

Thu Jan 15 03:17:57 CET 2009

> Reinier Bakels wrote:
>> Thx4 your since comments.
>> Some preliminary answers.
>> First, my schedule simply did not allow me to react earlier.
>
> So, just because you've been 'too busy' (we're ALL busy people) and 
> finally found time in your schedule for us, we're supposed to drop what 12 
> people have worked on quite a bit?
"What two people can do in two weeks, three people can do in three weeks." 
More people is not always efficient.
Besides, I believed it was in good hands. Well, I don't want to blame 
anybody, but - as I already said - the result is less than ideal.
>
>> Second, w8&c, the text I have in mind will be less rather than more 
>> legalistic. It is difficult, but I sincerely believe one must get 
>> directly to the point.
>
> Great, you believe that. We, the many people that actually believed enough 
> in this to make time, at the appropriate time, and make the document 
> structured the way we believe it should be done.
Sorry, I did not want to offend anybody. I think it is a very bad idea to 
start with human rights.
>
> A manifesto as an appealing text? the current manifesto document is fairly 
> appealing. it's just not written as a news article or press release. We 
> write a press release to go with it, and journalists write the articles. 
> The structure it's in now, is the proper structure for this type of 
> document.
The first thing to do now is to make a kind of declaration that explains the 
PP direction. A formal document for reference purposes is something else. I 
don't know for which document the term "manifesto" is appropriate. The 
former document should certainly be appealing to a broad public.
>
>> Fourth, should law play a role for a law maker? It my sounds 
>> contradictory, but - to make a long story short - yes, in order to 
>> prevent statements that will disqualify the PP *immediately* as 
>> unrealistic. Imho the challenge is rather to make very nasty proposals 
>> that still fit into any conceivable framework.
>
> You're still applying logic, to an area where logic does NOT work.
Sometimes I get the impression that there are two different streams: one 
aims at "radical" reform, making proposals unlikely to be accepted by 
anybody else, in the hope that political majorities eventually will take PP 
considerations into account, the other aims at proposals that are more 
likely to be accepted by a majority, but simply have not been made so far 
due to the lack of interest in "intellectual property" in the past. There is 
a lot to do in the latter field, and it would be a pity if opportunities to 
make real change in this field are missed because of a forcus on the former 
type of proposal.
Activists imo can voice pretty radical opinions, but politicans are required 
to contribute to the country's governance. It is their oath.
>> Finally, the Dutch PP is close to dead, but I try to involve people from 
>> ScriptumLibre. Remmebr that in NL it is relatively easy to found a new 
>> political party - so I feel a responsibility.
>
> Well, is it dead, or not? If it's dead, then there's no dutch party to 
> sign anyway, if it's not dead, then Samir is still the head, no? That's 
> logic.
There is no formalised (registered) association, and there is no board. 
Samir reads this and if he disagrees, he will say so. The only thing I know 
for sure is that he took over the maintenance/development of the website 
from Leon Burg.
>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Norton" 
>> <andrew.norton at pirate-party.us>
>> To: "Pirate Parties International -- General Talk" 
>> <pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 7:09 PM
>> Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] Pirate Manifesto: status of internal 
>> ballots
>>
>>
>> Reinier, If you had these concerns with the document, as great as these
>> concerns seem to be, why is it that you've waited until now to offer to
>> write an alternative. Why didn't you make this offer 3-4 *MONTHS* ago,
>> or best of all, turn up to the meetings where the contents were 
>> discussed?
>>
>> An inverted pyramid format is great for a press release, or news
>> article. A manifesto though, is not either. A manifesto is a statement
>> of intent, of political positioning that does not require that kind of
>> structure. Indeed, look at similar documents, including political
>> manifesto's of other parties, and indeed constitution documents. They're
>> not in that style.
>>
>> You say "if you want to keep NL on board", do you speak for the Dutch
>> Pirate Party, for ScriptumLibre or for yourself in this matter? It's
>> very hard to tell. As far as I'm aware, since Leon stepped down, Samir's
>> in charge of the party, and he is the one the party nominated to deal
>> with the manifesto, including voting.
>>
>> I've also read most of the emails of the past few weeks - just about
>> caught up - and my impression of you, gleamed from your writings, is
>> that of a lawyer. We are not dealing with legal cases here, we're
>> dealing with policital ones. In court, briefs rely on logic, fact, and a
>> touch of persuasiveness. politics is 10% fact, and the rest is appealing
>> to emotion. Look at all the anti-terrorism legislation made in the last
>> 10 years, or copyright legislation. Thre's little to no facts backing
>> them up, and despite that being pointed out a lot, its the emotional
>> arguments for the legislation that wins, trampling the fact-based
>> arguments against.
>>
>> Politics and law might be related, insofar as there are many lawyers in
>> politics. However, litigating the law, is radically different from
>> trying to get into a position to write them. This is something you don't
>> seem to grasp. People are creatures of emotion, so emotion is what we
>> have to appeal to.
>>
>> To get back on topic, the point of the manifesto is basically a written
>> Venn diagram of all our party positions. some don't like it, say 'well
>> this isn't going far enough'. Thats the point. If you as a party want to
>> go more extreme, they can. This is something that came up with I think
>> the Swedish party, that had a point about elimination, where someone
>> else had reduction, and didn't like 'reform' as it implied something
>> other than elimination. but basically, the intent is that it's a
>> straightforward statement of the common level of all parties. And,
>> remember Reinier, two 'different' pirate parties have existed in France,
>> and Finland, if the Dutch party forks, which is just what happened in
>> France, then so be it, the movement will adapt, and grow.
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>>
>> Reinier Bakels wrote:
>>> I will write a different "Manifesto" which will be ready in due time 
>>> before the Helsinki meeting (I am now in the US so I don't have much 
>>> time to work on it). All three present Manifesto versions start with an 
>>> elaborate expose about human rights and democracy. I don't think that is 
>>> useful. Firstly, for communication reasons the Manifesto imnsho must be 
>>> structured in the "inverted pyramid" format typical for journalism and 
>>> advertising. Secondly, the human rights argument is not the strongest 
>>> political argument we have for PP objectives, and may even be construed 
>>> adversely. For advertising/communication reasons, we must refrain from 
>>> arguments that are not 100% solid. Thirdly, I want to avoid the 
>>> impression that PP is another state reform party (which has a very 
>>> different connotation in different member states).
>>> If you want to keep NL on board of the PP movement, please consider my 
>>> forthcoming proposal - at least.
>>> Finally, this is not an attempt to start another flame war!
>>>
>>> Groeten, Grüße, Regards, Cordialement, Hälsningar, Ciao, Saygilar, 
>>> Üdvözlettel, Pozdrowienia, Kumusta, Adios, Oan't sjen, Ave, Doei, 
>>> Yassou, Yoroshiku, Slán, Vinarliga, Kær Kvedja
>>>>>> REINIER B. BAKELS PhD LL.M. MSc
>>> private: Johan Willem Frisostraat 149, 2713 CC Zoetermeer, The 
>>> Netherlands telephone: +31 79 316 3126, GSM ("Handy") +31 6 4988 6490, 
>>> fax +31 79 316 7221
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carlos Ayala Vargas" 
>>> <aiarakoa at yahoo.es>
>>> To: "Pirate Parties International -- General Talk" 
>>> <pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 3:23 PM
>>> Subject: [pp.int.general] Pirate Manifesto: status of internal ballots
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hello:
>>>>
>>>> Today and until 23th of January, 2009, in PIRATA we're going to decide 
>>>> which of 3 final drafts of Pirate Manifesto do we prefer:
>>>>
>>>> - http://int.piratenpartei.de/Pirate_Manifesto_Draft_A
>>>> - http://int.piratenpartei.de/Pirate_Manifesto_Draft_B
>>>> - http://int.piratenpartei.de/Pirate_Manifesto_Draft_C
>>>>
>>>> How are things regarding Pirate Manifesto in the rest of pirate 
>>>> parties? Remember that, in just 2 weeks, we have the Helsinki 
>>>> Conference. Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Carlos Ayala
>>>>
>>>> ( Aiarakoa )
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________
>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>