[pp.int.general] Electronic votes and safety + Election Results

[Jurgen Rateau aka JaRrr]

On 19/04/2010 22:04, Marco Confalonieri wrote:
> Il 19/04/2010 20:54, Sven Clement ha scritto:
>   
>>
>> I hope this answers all your questions. We did not make the ballots
>> available publicly because we believe that the handwriting (those are
>> write-in ballots after all) could be recognizable. If you insist anyway,
>> I think it will be possible for you to arrange something with the new CAO.
>>     
> I don't see the point in all this secrecy.
>   

That's your right Marco. Now I do see it and I think others do see it
also. This is a non-issue.

It's a classic. The ones who did not get elected will start attacking
the voting system, the integrity of the people managing it, unfairness
in rules of procedure, etc, etc.

Fact is votes have been hand written and this has been done publicly.
Votes have been submitted to a mixed panel of people. Input has been
done under (public) supervision. The system used to count the votes has
been proposed and agreed upon by everyone. Anyone could drop in and
question it. All of this by rules agreed upon beforehand. Everybody has
been given the opportunity to suggest alternatives and/or raise issues.
This has not been done. By none. Be it male or female.

Now it's done. Whining afterwards is just ... well, I'm very sorry to
have to say it  ... a littlebit silly. In my humble opinion an
ego-in-disguise thing.

We want ourselves to be original and creative parties, "do and see
things differently".  Fact is that at times, when I read, I just see the
emergence of good old and dusty traditional ways of doing, reasoning and
proceding. Shouldn't we try to think out of the box? Work on the V2.0 or
3.0 ? Aren't we supposed to innovate? Aren't we, as Pirates, rejecting
the FAIL of traditional ways of doing and proceding? Can we create
without accepting things being imperfect and even fail at times? And
should we shoot the people who actually work on it and try to make
things go forward?

Publicly critisising and blaming someone for his actions is always
easier and less tiering and risky than doing things and exposing yourself.
Please reconsider. That's the classical way of doing things within a
structure. This leads to inertia as the one who does the less ends up
winning the most.
Leads to mediocracy. Or a grinding halt. Danger.

We can not afford this to happen. We can not become a mere pale copy of
the oldschool. We should all fiercely fight this from happening. We need
to preserve pluralism and polarity.
Also, we have to be ready, at times, to pay the price we have to pay and
share the pains this birth is causing. And accept it as such. Be humble
and accept the fact we are only at the beginning, the start of this
journey. Things will improve. At least if we keep the means to enable
ourselves to do so. Technocracy will not and never did.

Where there is failure there is opportunity. Please address opportunity
and forget about failure. Forget the past, the present,  help with
defining the future. Or even better, work on it. We need you.
Also, you don't need a title or to be a board member to do so. You even
get more things done by not being on it, hence enjoy the freedom! 

(yes, pun intendend Jerry ! :p).

Regards,

Jurgen
PPBe

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0x9AB16D14.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3139 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20100420/ca791e06/attachment.key>