[pp.int.general] Greens saying Pirate Parties unnecessary
Eric Priezkalns
eric.priezkalns at pirateparty.org.uk
Wed Sep 16 03:15:07 CEST 2009
I don't think it will be the most important argument when stated
directly to voters, but I think we do have a basic philosophical
conflict with how the Green parties have tried to influence politics.
The Pirate parties are not trying to provide a full spectrum of
policies. We may get criticism for arguing for a narrow platform of
change, but I think it can be appealing to stay narrow. It allows us
to reach out to disaffected voters who are cynical about the arrogance
of traditional career politicians who claim to have answers to every
single problem. In contrast, the Greens do offer a full spectrum of
policies - without having done the research or accessed the expertise
to make many of those policies credible. For me, that makes the Green
parties as cynical as mainstream parties, in that they have promises
about everything for everybody. Except the Greens are worse, because
they can make promises without ever worrying about how to satisfy
them. And that is how I interpret the Green party stance on pirate
issues - yet another promise that they need not take seriously because
all that really matters is picking up some extra votes.
I would never vote Green because, from what I have seen, most of their
economic policies appear to be a mix of fantasy, wishful thinking and
unspoken but disturbing implications for human freedoms. The Greens
used to subscribe to a strong vein of zero economic growth, but now
are more timid when talking about this. That are wise to have changed
tactics. Zero growth can lead to some rather unpopular implications
for the control of population growth, delivering a fair distribution
of the world's wealth whilst maintaining the same quality of life of
those who live in rich countries, inhibiting the liberty of those who
desire to be wealthier, and even explaining why economic growth must
always be considered antagonistic to the environment. On the last
point, information technology has been a source of economic growth,
and clever use of information technology enables us to reduce waste
and help the environment. Maybe other pirates are keen on Green Party
economic policies. I'm probably not the only pirate who would oppose
them. Whether I'm right or wrong, we can maintain a unity of purpose
by focusing on what we really want to achieve, and ignoring policies
that fall outside of our interests. That gives us a tactical
advantage over the Greens and any other party that tries to cover the
full spectrum of political issues.
Let us be honest. If any of the Pirate parties tried to develop a
complete economic policy, it would be no better than that of the
Greens. An intimate and passion interest in privacy, copyright or
patents does not make somebody qualified to determine how best to
change public spending or the impact of changes in taxation. Not
getting involved in unnecessary debates is a strength instead of a
weakness - there is no need to appear arrogant or leave ourselves open
to unnecessary attack, if we keep a tight focus on important issues
not properly addressed elsewhere.
Those are the reasons why we are a real threat to the Greens, and why
they will try to kill us by saying we are unnecessary. If we get lots
of votes without having a broad manifesto of policies, then it
challenges the Green political strategy. Perhaps the world needs to
cut carbon emissions more aggressively. Pirates all believe it needs
IP reform. Wouldn't an honest politician say the obvious - that there
is no genuine philosophical or political connection between the two
issues? Wouldn't it be honest to say you can support one without
supporting the other? That exemplifies the difference between the two
movements. The Greens have an interest in our policies because they
are opportunists, jumping on a popular bandwagon. We avoid commenting
on their policies because we focus on the issues we really care
about. Which makes for the more appealing politician to a cynical
voter - the opportunist who chases popularity, or the dedicated and
passionate individual who only pursues the reforms he really cares
about? That is why the world needs Pirate Parties - and doesn't need
Green promises to represent pirate interests.
E
On 15 Sep 2009, at 22:03, Andrew Norton wrote:
> What gets me about the green party, is that they're a mess of
> conflicting 'green' issues. I've seen green party supporters
> advocating wind power, and others oppose it because it can kill birds.
> issues like this kill me. The biggest one, is the whole car thing.
> They want plug-in cars, and hybrids. changing my big car (a 91 chevy
> lumina, with a 3.1V6) to a prius will NOT save the planet, it'll harm
> it. I get maybe 27mpg from it, but the energy put in is only fuel now.
> If I dispose of it, there's the waste from the crushed car and the
> energy to do that, plus the energy to MAKE the new one (and lets not
> forget those lovely nickel batteries, mined in Canada, refined in
> China, made in Japan and shipped back to the US. They have to be
> replaced every few years. My car's almost 20 years old and hasn't had
> any major repairs or replacement.
>
> Plug-ins are even worse. It's shifting energy generation from
> on-vehicle, to at large central sites, and adding a much greater
> number of energy conversion steps (theres something like 12 voltage
> changes between a typical power station, and the street-level power
> lines, each one wasting power. Add more into the charging system, and
> another out and to the wheels, and you've got massive loss, not green
> at all (and we won't even go to the whole nuclear debate, it's always
> NIMBY, and worries about the waste - reprocess!. Put research into it.
> I did hear of one possible project to deal with nuclear waste,
> basically involved a small particle accelerator, firing protons at
> waste, either making it into a stable residue, or useful fuel, but
> either way removing the problem of waste. Needless to say, funding was
> killed 5 years ago.
>
> This is my problem with greens; bad sense judgments based on
> short-term goals at the expense of the long term. look how well that's
> worked out with economics.
>
> If they can't even get their core philosophy right, what chance with
> the rest....
>
> Andrew
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Tim Fretz <tim.fretz at usask.ca> wrote:
>> Thought I might interject with a Canadian perspective.
>>
>> Before I go any further I would suggest that this is an issue that
>> needs to be dealt with at the national level and perhaps at the EU
>> level. The arguments for Canada are not necessarily going to work
>> in the rest of the world. Each national party has it's own
>> peculiarities due to their countries unique political and legal
>> situation.
>>
>> 1) A pirate vote is not a lost Green vote. The Pirate Party can
>> attract all kinds of voters that the Green party and others can not.
>>
>> The last federal election in Canada had the worst voter turnout
>> ever. Only 58.8% of eligible voters in Canada voted, there has
>> been a steady decline since the early 90s. The under 30 crowd is
>> notorious for not voting. Part of the Pirate strategy is to get
>> young people engaging in politics and voting. So the argument that
>> a Pirate vote would be a lost Green (or NDP) vote is fallacious. A
>> vote for the PPoC is likely to come from someone who previously
>> didn't vote.
>>
>> Secondly, many within the PPoC formerlly voted for the
>> Conservatives, some were even card carrying members of the
>> Conservative party. Our active members range from left to right
>> (Green to Conservative) to those, like myself, that don't feel any
>> of the existing parties represent them. Any "stolen votes" seem to
>> be as likely to come from any part of the political spectrum. This
>> debate should not be about the splitting the vote on the left but
>> about how the Pirate Party can pull support from all kinds of
>> voters. If the Greens want to say the Pirates aren't needed then
>> they need to show they can get 'C' or 'c' conservatives to back
>> them not just those on the left, because the Pirates has already
>> found support from across the political spectrum and from people
>> who don't fit on the political spectrum.
>>
>> 2) The Pirate Party prioritizes IP reform and protecting privacy.
>>
>> These issues may be in other party platforms but they have failed
>> to prioritize them. All the people who I have spoken with that
>> were eligable to vote in last Canadian election had no idea that
>> the Green Party of Canada even had a policy on IP. The only IP
>> policy anyone knew about was the related directly to Bill-C61
>> (Canadian DMCA) which the Conservatives failed to pass in the last
>> sitting. Beyond the parties' positions on Bill-C61 not one voter
>> could tell me what any of the political party IP or privacy
>> policies were. Failing to prioritize the Pirate Party's issues has
>> made the other parties incompetent in getting a mandate from their
>> voters and taking action on the issues. The issues need to be
>> prioritized to elevate discussion and create awareness.
>>
>> 3) Elected or not everytime the Pirate Party is mentioned the
>> priority of IP legislation and privacy protection is raised. By
>> contrast getting the Greens mentioned elevates environmental issues.
>>
>> We could lobby the existing parties, but lobbying seems to have
>> been ineffective in many countries where DMCA, data-retension and
>> now three-strike laws are being legislated. So now we are arming
>> ourselves to hit the parties where it really hurts, the ballot
>> box. The Pirate Party is creating a simple choice for the
>> politicians, talk the Pirates and the Pirate issues thus elevating
>> them or ignore the Pirate Party and watch a new party take off.
>> When the Pirate Party is successful we will be able to elevate the
>> priority of IP reform and privacy rights on our own.
>>
>> The Pirate Parties are needed because they force the issues of IP
>> reform and privacy rights to be discussed. The comments by
>> Elizabeth May are proof. Until the last couple months ago when she
>> started being asked about the Pirate Party she had hardly said a
>> word about IP policy or privacy rights, let alone manage to get her
>> policy publicized, even to the ineternet. The PPoC is needed to
>> make her and every other political party talk about these issues.
>>
>> Remember these arguments need to be tailored to your political
>> situation.
>>
>> -Tim
>>
>> On September 15, 2009 08:42:24 am jamie king wrote:
>>> Actually I can back Eric up. I happened to be at a wedding with a
>>> prominent German Green two or three days ago, who definitely thought
>>> the Pirate Party was irrelevant.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> J
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Eric Priezkalns
>>> <eric.priezkalns at pirateparty.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> Thanks Alex, for pointing out I understand zilch. I hope you
>>>> won't be
>>>> speaking to voters, if this is how you deal with me.
>>>>
>>>> As I pointed out in my original email, there are Greens in Europe
>>>> saying and
>>>> doing similar things to the Canadians - saying that the Pirate
>>>> Party is
>>>> unnecessary and people should vote Green instead. I'm not alone
>>>> in noticing
>>>> this. You seem to prefer a make-believe that two separate
>>>> political parties
>>>> can exist without competing for the same voters. I'm asking that
>>>> the party
>>>> deals with this instead of living in a fantasy or doing nothing
>>>> whilst
>>>> rivals take the initiative.
>>>>
>>>> You seem to confuse two different things - that parties need to
>>>> compete for
>>>> votes in elections but that their representatives need to work
>>>> together
>>>> after they are elected. I'm talking about competing with the
>>>> Greens for
>>>> votes. When you say "where pirates need allies, greens are
>>>> usually the best
>>>> bet", what are you talking about? When you campaign to get
>>>> Pirate Party
>>>> votes, what will you tell people who say they will vote Green
>>>> instead
>>>> because they don't see a need to have a Pirate Party? Will you
>>>> tell them
>>>> they are making the right decision? Will you politely explain
>>>> why a vote
>>>> for the Pirate Party is better than voting Green? Or will you
>>>> just be rude
>>>> to them and hope that will have the right effect?
>>>>
>>>> Making the argument for separate Pirate Parties is vital for our
>>>> success.
>>>> We cannot just make the argument for the policies, because
>>>> rivals can jump
>>>> on the bandwagon for popular pirate policies, whilst undermining
>>>> the actual
>>>> Pirate Parties.
>>>>
>>>> So please, cut the rudeness and focus on the question: who in the
>>>> PPI is
>>>> doing what to make the argument that we really need separate
>>>> Pirate Parties.
>>>> I just wanted to hear what the PPI is doing and how it will
>>>> coordinate with
>>>> national campaign efforts (that is the purpose of the PPI, isn't
>>>> it?) If
>>>> you're not doing it, then fine - be quiet and let somebody else
>>>> say if they
>>>> are doing something or if they plan to do something.
>>>>
>>>> E
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 15 Sep 2009, at 14:44, Alex Foti wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> no, you don't understand zilch. greens are greens and pirates are
>>>>> pirates, but eurogreens are not saying that pirates aren't
>>>>> necessary.
>>>>> Of course nobody wants to lose votes to a new party, but using a
>>>>> canadian green's statement to construct a european position is
>>>>> kinda
>>>>> ridiculous. Pirate parties have been made necessary by the
>>>>> assault on
>>>>> fundamental freedoms. Where pirates need allies, greens are
>>>>> usually
>>>>> the best bet. ciao, lx
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Eric Priezkalns
>>>>> <eric.priezkalns at pirateparty.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm bemused. I thought that asking Pirates to make an argument
>>>>>> for the
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> for separate Pirate Parties would be straightforward. Instead
>>>>>> we're
>>>>>> getting
>>>>>> arguments for why there is no need for separate Pirate Parties!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This makes me wonder if the PPI won't be making any positive
>>>>>> arguments
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the need for separate Pirate Parties to compete in elections -
>>>>>> a rather
>>>>>> amazing conclusion and I hope I am proven wrong. Note what I
>>>>>> am asking
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> not to argue for the policies, but for the parties. Why do the
>>>>>> parties
>>>>>> need
>>>>>> to exist? If the policies can be delivered without the
>>>>>> parties, as the
>>>>>> Greens suggest, that undermines the argument for forming the
>>>>>> parties and
>>>>>> fielding candidates that compete with the Greens and all other
>>>>>> rivals.
>>>>>> The
>>>>>> Green attack is straightforward - the pirate policies are good,
>>>>>> but the
>>>>>> Pirate Parties are unnecessary. And this argument is not just
>>>>>> being made
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> Canada, but in many countries.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the purpose of the PPI is to represent pirate policies, but
>>>>>> not Pirate
>>>>>> Parties, it has very little reason to exist. Somebody needs to
>>>>>> do the
>>>>>> important work of handling and countering propaganda from rival
>>>>>> parties,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> that includes rival parties that say they agree with our
>>>>>> policies but
>>>>>> question our political strategy. If not done by the PPI, this
>>>>>> will still
>>>>>> need to be done. The difference is that it will be done only
>>>>>> by the
>>>>>> national parties who field the candidates and have to live in
>>>>>> the real
>>>>>> world
>>>>>> where Pirates will compete with all rival parties, including
>>>>>> the Greens.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> don't want to see Pirates fighting Pirates because a Green
>>>>>> Party in one
>>>>>> country points at a Swedish MEP and says - "look, he sits with
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Greens,
>>>>>> so he supports all the policies of the Greens". It would be
>>>>>> better that
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> argument for Pirate Parties be coordinated internationally to
>>>>>> avoid
>>>>>> causing
>>>>>> difficulties between Pirate Parties in different countries.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> E
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 15 Sep 2009, at 13:53, Alex Foti wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> your subject should've been more correctly titled "Canadian
>>>>>>> Greens
>>>>>>> saying Pirate Parties unnecessary", because a cursory reading
>>>>>>> makes it
>>>>>>> look like Cohn-Bendit or some other prominent greens said
>>>>>>> that. Also,
>>>>>>> climate change is a pretty big issue and I don't really see
>>>>>>> how greens
>>>>>>> would compromise pirate rights for climate justice. In
>>>>>>> general, I have
>>>>>>> a hard time thinking of an eco-issue where there's a tradeoff
>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>> environmental needs and rights of expression (maybe it's my
>>>>>>> lack of
>>>>>>> imagination). Finally, it's telling that Benkler in The Wealth
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> Networks brands as greens the group embracing a sharing
>>>>>>> philosophy of
>>>>>>> p2p production, as distinct from the blues embracing strong
>>>>>>> public
>>>>>>> domain coupled with copyright law, and the reds favoring market
>>>>>>> copyrighted solutions always (in the US, democrats are blue and
>>>>>>> republicans are red).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ciao and solidarity to german pirates beaten by police,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> lx
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Eric Priezkalns
>>>>>>> <eric.priezkalns at pirateparty.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jamie,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't understand your point. The Canadians and other Green
>>>>>>>> parties
>>>>>>>> say
>>>>>>>> there is no need for a Pirate Party because they have the
>>>>>>>> relevant
>>>>>>>> policies
>>>>>>>> already. You respond by saying this is not just propaganda -
>>>>>>>> does that
>>>>>>>> mean
>>>>>>>> you don't think there is a need for a Pirate Party? When
>>>>>>>> other parties
>>>>>>>> say
>>>>>>>> they have green policies, do the Greens say "look, they have
>>>>>>>> green
>>>>>>>> policies
>>>>>>>> - we don't need to exist"? My question wasn't about whether
>>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> nice fuzzy feeling about the Greens deep down in their soul
>>>>>>>> or whether
>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>> think the Greens are run by lovely people with their hearts
>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>> right
>>>>>>>> place when it comes to intellectual property. It was about
>>>>>>>> how they
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> using propaganda to hurt the Pirate Parties and asking how
>>>>>>>> the Pirate
>>>>>>>> Parties intend to respond. Either the response is collective
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> international level, or it will have to be done at national
>>>>>>>> level,
>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>> somebody has to respond. Green candidates are going to
>>>>>>>> compete with
>>>>>>>> Pirate
>>>>>>>> candidates for the same votes. If Green Parties say there is
>>>>>>>> no need
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> Pirate Parties and point to the European Parliament as
>>>>>>>> evidence, the
>>>>>>>> correct
>>>>>>>> answer from a Pirate Party spokesperson or candidate cannot
>>>>>>>> be to
>>>>>>>> simply
>>>>>>>> comment on what a good job the Greens would do if they were
>>>>>>>> elected
>>>>>>>> instead
>>>>>>>> of the Pirate Party's candidate.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> E
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 15 Sep 2009, at 13:07, jamie king wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't say it's just propaganda. The uk Greens showed
>>>>>>>>> 'STEAL THIS
>>>>>>>>> FILM II' at their conference last year -- so I guess even
>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>> Pirate Party looked more viable, they were thinking about
>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>> issues. Just saying.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> j
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Eric Priezkalns
>>>>>>>>> <eric.priezkalns at pirateparty.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is a snip from an interview with the leader of the
>>>>>>>>>> Greens in
>>>>>>>>>> Canada,
>>>>>>>>>> Elizabeth May. The full interview is
>>>>>>>>>> here: http://www.p2pnet.net/story/28206
>>>>>>>>>> "p2pnet: What do you think of Pirate Parties and the fact
>>>>>>>>>> it looks as
>>>>>>>>>> though
>>>>>>>>>> Canada and soon join other countries in having one of its
>>>>>>>>>> own?
>>>>>>>>>> May: Did you notice that the Pirate Party in the EU
>>>>>>>>>> Parliament has
>>>>>>>>>> joined
>>>>>>>>>> the Green Caucus? We don’t need a pirate party in Canada.
>>>>>>>>>> The greens
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> championing those issues. We shouldn’t further fracture the
>>>>>>>>>> efforts
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> Canadians who want to restore real democracy, including in
>>>>>>>>>> undemocratic
>>>>>>>>>> copyright rules."
>>>>>>>>>> Elizabeth May has previously said similar things in an
>>>>>>>>>> attempt to
>>>>>>>>>> undermine
>>>>>>>>>> the Pirate Party of Canada. We've got 'Green Pirates'
>>>>>>>>>> trying to win
>>>>>>>>>> new
>>>>>>>>>> votes for the Green party in mainland Europe. In the UK,
>>>>>>>>>> similar
>>>>>>>>>> things
>>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> starting to happen, with the Green Party attempting to
>>>>>>>>>> undermine
>>>>>>>>>> Pirate
>>>>>>>>>> Party support because they see it as a threat.
>>>>>>>>>> Who is taking the lead to counter Green Party propaganda,
>>>>>>>>>> publicly
>>>>>>>>>> saying
>>>>>>>>>> there is a need for a separate Pirate Party movement? If
>>>>>>>>>> it is not
>>>>>>>>>> coordinated internationally, than national parties will
>>>>>>>>>> have no
>>>>>>>>>> choice
>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>> to fight back individually to stop votes, members and
>>>>>>>>>> support being
>>>>>>>>>> lost
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> the Green Party.
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Eric
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Eric Priezkalns
>>>>>>>>>> Treasurer
>>>>>>>>>> Pirate Party UK
>>>>>>>>>> +44 7958 467273
>>>>>>>>>> treasurer at pirateparty.org.uk
>>>>>>>>>> http://pirateparty.org.uk
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>>>>>>>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
>>>>>>>>> location BERLIN
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> CURRENTLY WORKING ON: VODO.NET, DARKFIBRE.IN, FRINGY.NET
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> twitter: #dark_fibre #vodo #fringy
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> phone (for voice calls please consider any
>>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>> difference)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Local landline: + 49 30 657 99496
>>>>>>>>> UK: + 44 20 8133 7673
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> chat
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> jabber -- jamie_k at bootlab.org / skype -- jamie_jk / msn --
>>>>>>>>> jjr_king
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> gtalk -- jk.jamie at gmail.com / iChat/AIM -- iamth30th3r
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> YIM! -- jamie_j_king / ICQ -- 335452203
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> asynchronous
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> twitter [personal] - @jamie_jk occasional
>>>>>>>>> blog --
>>>>>>>>> jamie.com
>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> 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
More information about the pp.international.general
mailing list