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

[Reinier Bakels]

>> 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.
> From Piratpartiet web site:
>
> "/The Pirate Party wants to fundamentally reform copyright law, get rid of
> the patent system, *and ensure that citizens' rights to privacy are
> respected*. With this agenda, and only this, we are making a bid for
> representation in the European and Swedish parliaments.
>
> Not only do we think these are worthwhile goals. *We also believe they are
> realistically achievable on a European basis*./"
>
> http://www.piratpartiet.se/international/english
>
> You enjoy often using Piratpartiet as an example; however, when you state
> that privacy is not a PPI core issue, and that certain statements would
> supposedly be unrealistic ... who are you talking on behalf to? Not on
> behalf of Piratpartiet, not on behalf of PIRATA, probably not on behalf of
> any single pirate party, so ... on behalf of who? I don't what Swedish
> folks think about you considering some of their goals as /unrealistic/;
> from their web site, I guess they'll disagree.

You interpreted my comment in an unduly negative sense. The essence of my
comment was to make ("nasty") proposals "ome can not realistically oppose.
There are changes that can (and must, imho) be implemented short time. I was
just informed that the foundation seeking criminal enforcement of copyright
in NL again was given the opportunity to make very nasty statements in a
major newspaper ("if it is free, it is likely to be illegal"). The reality
about p2p filesharing was vehemently violated by an attorney who was cited.

As I explained some two weeks ago, it is the trick to make proposals thaat
have maximum impact - with impact defined as the product of 1) extent of
change 2) likelyhood of change actually to occur. Explanation: if you want
*paradise*, that is marvelous, but unlikely to occur. If you want to prevent
copyright to be extended from life+70 to life+80, what is likely ot occur,
but by no means impressive. The trutch - as always - is in the middle.

I also explained that a political movement imho poses different requirements
than an action group. Political movements are not on earth to make just
strategic statements, bu to achieve something.

reinier