[pp.int.general] Reinier & PPNL

[Core TX]

Comments below.

2009/1/15 Carlos Ayala Vargas <aiarakoa at yahoo.es>

> Core TX wrote:
>
>> When it comes to Reinier his statement,
>>
> First of all:
>
> - you are Piraten Partij representative, not him; I don't know why don't
> you rebuke him for making those menaces -he didn't just threaten us with
> Piraten Partij's withdrawal from PPI (very surprising, considering how he
> talks about the possibility of withdrawing of European Union), but also
> threatens Piraten Partij (maybe if you don't agree with him) with creating a
> new party from ScriptumLibre! ("/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/")-; I don't know why do you consent his behaviour
>
>
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2009-January/002549.html



Vrijschrift/ScriptumLibre ideologie seems to equal Pirate ideologie.
However, we ( PPNL ) where founded after the swedish "Call to arms" All
members have agreed that PPNL will follow the PPI footsteps. The Swedish
Party is the origin, thus we will allow them to veto.Communicateing a
mandate is different from communicateing a ideologie. I sincerely hope you
can see the difference. We wish X  because we believe in Y.
Choices should be made because of facts, not because of someone his
believes.If you think differently, you should consider reinstateing the
spanish inquisition, join the Jihad or start bloweing up cars with the ETA.
We'll see how much succes hou will have. ( Palestinians got their state
/after/ they stopped their Jihad & started diplomacy. But they did not drop
their ideologie )
( Because of you temperament, i'd like to say that this is not personal
gesture or insult, just a figure of speech, so dont flame please )


>
> - he's talking about a new proposal, but where is such proposal? Helsinki
> Conference starts on 30th of January, and it would be recommendable to know
> whether pirate parties sign any of the drafts or not prior to that, which
> would require a reasonably length internal balloting period; when is he
> willing to announce his proposal? He is plainly irresponsible.


No the people not proposeing anything are the ones irresponsible. And that
group of people does not include you, or Reinier.
But it does include me while i am responsible for the dutch contribution.
As the dutch representative, i hereby formally declare my trust in Reinier
his words.
And if you trust me thus PPNL, you know he will keep his word.


>  I stand by his side. I see verry little added value in the new "manifest"
>> when compared to the original swedish "declaration of principles' that i use
>> as a main guideline.
>>
> Why do you use the quotes for manifest? About the /little added value/,
> first of all, the Swedish "/declaration of principles/" is just the Swedish
> one; Pirate Manifesto is meant to be our common one; about differences, let
> me show you some examples comparing that Swedish (do you mean this one <
> http://www.piratpartiet.se/international/english>?) with, e.g., Draft C:
>

Reinier already pointed out wich dangers it might provide. The only profit
we make is that of union. United we stand, devided we fall.
Therefore the international /manifest/ must be watertight. So please be
aware of the fact that i did not choose *any* /manifest/ yet.


> - general principles
> * Piratpartiet "/wants to fundamentally reform copyright law, get rid of
> the patent system//, and ensure that citizens' rights to privacy are
> respected/"
> * Draft C also wants to protect rule of law, pressumption of innocence and
> right to a fair trial, fight against discrimination, deal with Information
> Society, ask for Government transparency & accountability, etc
>

It looks promiseing, yet you failed to persuade the Swedish. Do you know why
?
I doubt you do, and are simply trying to push a agenda. ( One i personally
do like )
( Temperament notice: Not a insult, just my perception, so please do not
flame )


> - about patents
> * Piratpartiet "/wants to /[...]/ get rid of the patent system/"
> * Draft C only aims to reform the patent system, though allowing PPSE to
> get rid of it *in the Swedish scope
> *


When you get rid of it, you eventually end up with a "alternative" . The
difference is merely one that only exists in words.
Yet again, a fine example of the difference between, communicateing a
ideologie, versus communicateing a direct step forward c.q ( partial )
solution. ( One that binds you ! )


>
> - about author's rights
> * Piratpartiet wants "/non-commercial use/" to "/be free from day one/"
> * Draft C only talks about non-commercial filesharing, giving room for
> pirate parties to decide what to do with other issues like derivative works
> and such
>

The manifest is about union, Draft C devides us on this point.
Besides, i agree with Piratpartiet on this one, and it does not exclude nor
include derrivative works etc. ( completely different topic )


> - about non-core issues
> * Piratpartiet closes the door to non-core issues
> * Draft C opens the door, for each pirate party, to include non-core issues
> as long as they don't oppose or contradict the agreed core issues; it also
> talks about allowing citizens to express in non-core issues, to make us know
> the right path
>

This is just plain logic or is it not ? Why include it at all ?
We just need to include what we all stand fore. Not what devides us. Unless
you would like to create a manual for our  opponents.
More importantly, it would cost us our leverage.


> Etc, etc. Do you still believe that there little added value there? There
> is great added value, being Pirate Manifesto conceived as a /Venn diagram/
> of our goals the most important one -remember, some day will have to act
> together in the Europarliament, the WIPO meetings, the UN sessions, etc ...
> how would we do it if we even don't know what do we have in common?-.
> **
>

I agree there should be a uniteing manifest. So does Reinier. I just do not
wish to rush it OR include dangerous statements that lateron can damage ALL
partys
This is as important as writeing a constitution. We will not even simply
choose the best of all available options. We will only choose to sign if it
is perfect.
Unless all other partys sign, since i'd take that as proof of our
misconception.


>  As a closeing note, i would like to point out that within a political
>> party choices are to be made in a democratic fashion.
>>
> I'm pretty sure of that; even, remember that I suggested you -as you
> weren't able for the amendments period to contact your fellow party members-
> to not cast Piraten Partij's votes if they were not properly discussed and
> voted, so I think that this time, having enough time -and having the
> previous case in mind-, your signature will represent Piraten Partij's.
> Regards,



I'd be embarrased if i have to ask all members to vote on these drafts.They
are all hard to reach and hell would break loose. I will only propose a
manifest, or drafts after they are all debated.
( Half of them are not intelligent enough to think about this, and will ask
me or Reinier if it is "good" or not. )
We already have concencus about our ideology. We just need to say, "This
manifest does fit" or "This manifest does not fit"  .
Then we continue focus on solutions. My perception tell me you are stil in
the ideology fase while trying to create a ideology. While Reinier is in the
solution fase, while trying to create a solution.
Maybe we need  2 different statements, one proposeing a ideology, and one
telling people what the solution looks like.

United we stand, devided we fall.

Samir.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20090116/c32cd781/attachment.htm>