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

[Carlos Ayala Vargas]

Reinier Bakels wrote:
> Calm down! Neither you nor the people who met each other in Berlin and 
> Uppsala are in a position to set formal requirements for each other 
> (nor reversely, of course!)
I possitively don't know what are you talking about. Check this page

http://int.piratenpartei.de/Pirate_Manifesto#Who

then you'll be able to find pirate parties *representatives* (including 
Samir), *and, of course, the one who represents a party is in position, 
together with the rest of the peers from the rest of pirate parties, to 
set formal requirements* -provided that such representative talks on 
behalf of the party where belongs and that informs that party about the 
conversations held-. Neither Berlin nor Uppsala attendance were 
plenipotentiaries nor representatives -some may have attended, but not 
all of them were-, however the attendance of the Pirate Manifesto 
sessions -except, maybe, of the Helmut/Jens controversy- were actual 
representatives.
> The end goal is a political movement against threats to information 
> freedom (etc.), and to cooperate as much as possible, but not beyond.
I think it's not quite easy to cooperate on issues where there is no 
agreement or, at least, not quite much; thus, knowing what do we have in 
common is essential to be able to cooperate and make joint efforts. That 
idea inspired, since 2006's Rick Falkvinge first efforts, the need of 
that common manifesto.
> Ok, you force me to be explicit. The three manifesto drafts were 
> written just by some of us, because the cooperation was less than 
> pleasant - flame wars - what a coincidence. The end result is just not 
> good enough to win the "war". Now don't blame me for late comments.
But of course I blame you for late comments. Because it's quite easy to 
not participate in drafting sessions, nor in the amending process -this 
has been a considerably long and fully open process-, only to yell in 
the very end "/stop the press!/". In july 2008 representatives agreed to 
have the Pirate Manifesto ready for the Helsinki Conference, so just in 
case that decision should be reversed, it's not up to you; it's up to 
the pirate parties, and to be expressed through their representatives.
> I am prepared to help. If the result (yet to be drafted) is not OK, we 
> have schisma in the PP movement.
Schism does not depend on whether you support or not the approved draft, 
as you are an individual member of one pirate party -which, as far as I 
know, hasn't decided yet which draft to support; and when that party, 
Piraten Partij, decides on which draft does it support (or if doesn't 
support any), Samir will announce it properly to us through the usual 
ways; Samir, not you (as Samir is the Piraten Partij representative, not 
you)-.
> Congratulations!
You /congratulate/ me? for that supposed schism? Are you, maybe, putting 
the blame on me for such hypothetical schism? People attending Stage 
One's sessions is aware of my work on consenssus -and I've already 
talked in this list about how I rejected february'08 attempts from some 
people to unilaterally draft the Manifesto: *I think and I always 
thought the Manifesto is meant to be a consenssus text *(understanding 
consenssus as having all or almost all pirate parties supporting the 
approved draft)*, and that was my agenda, one of all pirate parties 
being considered within PPI as peers*-.

So I dismiss your /irony/ and consider it blatantly nonsensical and far 
from the truth. If any schism happens, and comparing schisms with fever, 
the Manifesto wouldn't be the cause of the fever, nor even the fever 
itself, but a mere /thermometer/. However, I hope your forecast becomes 
totally wrong, that all pirate parties cast their opinion on which draft 
do they prefer, and eventually that all or almost all of us can be able 
to agree on the same draft.
> But I understand why you are urging me to have my draft early: you 
> want to be prepared to block it in Helsinki.
False, once more. I don't need to block nothing from you: if the pirate 
parties will comes to be having the Manifesto ready to be signed in 
Helsinki -as agreed in july during the Stage One sessions-, then you 
need to have your proposal ready to be showed now; otherwise, there 
wouldn't be enough time to be properly considered and, eventually, voted.

And that, only if pirate parties want to have the Draft ready for 
Helsinki -as agreed in Stage One sessions-. If, however, pirate parties 
changed their mind, Helsinki wouldn't be a problem in that context ... 
however, we would have other problems, as in that case we would concur 
to the EU election without even having clear:

- who we are as a political movement for the international worldwide scope
- more specifically, which are our common goals for the EU Election, for 
the 2009-14 term -seems quite difficult to create a joint platform 
and/or to coordinate joint efforts without having clear our common goals-

because -and I don't know if you were aware of, Reinier- next PPI 
Conference (probably in Poland, I think it was the existing proposal) is 
scheduled for Summer 2009, *after the EU Election*. Don't you give 
importance to that? I give, representatives who attended Stage One 
sessions gave, and I guess pirate parties still give importance to that 
-as they haven't stated the opposite, as far as I know-.


                                                                   
                              Carlos Ayala
                                                                                                 
( Aiarakoa )

                                                                       
Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman