[pp.int.general] Minor orthographic improvements to the manifesto (draft B)

[Carlos Ayala Vargas]

Per von Zweigbergk wrote:
> I know this is late in coming, but I believe the changes I'm 
> suggesting are small and uncontroversial.
Probably pirate parties wouldn't object on fixing typos :)
> However, there are three minor issues that I'd like to propose changed:
>
> 1. In all three drafts, under the chapter "About Author's Rights", 
> there is the phrase "allowing the extention of authors rights". Here, 
> the word extension is misspelled as "extention".
If there is a misspelling there, while I should consult PIRATA, I 
personally see no problem in fixing that :)
> 2. In all three drafts, under the chapter "About Information Society", 
> there is the phrase "wired and/or wireless Internet". I believe that 
> the words "wired and/or wireless" are redundant and can be removed.
I disagree with that one: /wired and/or wireless/ means having one of 
those solutions, or both; removing it alters the meaning of the phrase 
.... it may improve or worsen it, anyway it changes it significantly.
> 3. In draft B, under the chapter "About Government Accountability and 
> Transparency", there is the phrase "public scrutiny into the affairs 
> of state should be mandatory". While this ranges a bit above an 
> orthographic correction, *I believe that the spirit of the pirate 
> movement is better represented by*
Thus, it's not a /small and uncontroversial change/, but rather a sort 
of amendment.
> replacing "public scrutiny into the affairs of state should be 
> mandatory" with "affairs of state must always be subject to public 
> scrutiny". The reason for this change, is that the original 
> formulation makes it sound like it must be mandatory for some member 
> of the public to scrutinize.
Think about this: general elections are mandatory -have to be held-; 
however, unless in certain countries like Argentina, people is not 
individually obliged to vote. Thus, what is mandatory is not a specific 
citizens making the scrutiny of public offices, but the very scrutiny 
existing. About what the author meant, you can ask people who 
participated in the drafting process -e.g., Andrew and me, among 
others-, just to check whether I'm right or wrong.
> Again, my apologies on the late comments on the pirate manifesto 
> drafts (I have simply not read the document in such detail prior to 
> now), and if these changes can be made in an expedient way (especially 
> changes 1 and 2), I believe that they should be made. If not, I'd be 
> happy with any of the three drafts put forward, although I personally 
> prefer Draft B.
>
> I'm going to leave the formal procedure to submit these changes to 
> somebody more familiar with the draft system.
Don't worry. As I say, I don't think that pirate parties make objections 
to fixing typos -it's usual in legislative procedures-. However, making 
changes to the meaning of parts of the text is a very different issue. 
Regards


                                                                                              
Carlos Ayala
                                                                                              
( Aiarakoa )

                                                                         
Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman