[pp.int.general] Is PPI dead, or was it ever really born?

[Andrew Norton]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 9/27/2010 3:22 AM, Sven Clement wrote:
> Hello Andrew,
> 
> As I'm not a board member of the PPI I can only point out my personal
> opinion, but without starting a flamewar I want to take the opposite
> point of view.
> 
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Andrew Norton <ktetch at gmail.com
> <mailto:ktetch at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> I say this with a heavy heart, but after 5 months, I think it's time we
> faced facts and called the PPI a still-born baby, bury it and move on.
> 
> 
>> There I simply disagree!
> 
> 
> 
> The whole statutes thing was where it first went off the rocks, using a
> messy forum system to try and write statutes, it'd never work out well,
> and it didn't. Then when they were finally done, they were done AT the
> conference, so those that couldn't attend were unable to see them,
> instead we had a pdf document that didn't match what was talked over.
> Who was responsible for this?
> 
> There was an email that went out April the 17th, from Will Tovey,
> (http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2010-April/006591.html)
> "Here is the document that we will be using for the discussion of the
> statutes. Please note, that it is not the Statutes, and is not legal or
> binding in any way yet. Parts of it could (and will) be changed by the
> worldwide Assembly of the representatives of the Pirate Parties later on
> today.
> 
> P.S: Jurgen, can you please forward this document to all registered
> attendees
> at the conference? Thank you!"
> 
> The day before, and we've only just got the DRAFT of them. The next day,
> Steffen Ortmann posted this
> (http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2010-April/006608.html)
> "The final (but still unsigned) version of the PPI statutes
> are now available on th wiki.
> 
> http://int.piratenpartei.de/Main_Page"
> 
> 
>> That mistake was noticed and I personally am not happy about this and I
>> don't think that it was the mistake of the current board but more of a
>> general lack of agreement about what the PPI should or should not be.
>> The statutes proposal had to be modular to be easily modifiable by the
>> general assembly because it was not clear what PPI should do.
>> Furthermore but this is my personal opinion, PPI was badly restrained by
>> the fact that they are not allowed to ask for a membership fee. But hey,
>> who needs money to organize things?

The people running it can't organise it without payment, then paying
them is just throwing money away. how many of us get paid for this sort
of thing? very few, and yet we mostly seem to have a semblance of
competence.

There was plenty of agreement of what PPI should be, mainly because it's
been agreed for the last 2 years. The problem is, the people responsible
for the statutes, were just incompetent and/or lazy. They went to a
piss-poor forum to try and create them, which was a huge source of
issues, and then didn't bother to deliver as promised.


> 
> 
> 
> The conference itself was also a mess. Part of that was due to the
> volcano, but the rest was just, let's be blunt, piss-poor planning.
> There was a camera that often was not pointed at the 'meeting', and the
> sound wasn't very good. Participants via the net (for those not in the
> EU who had a) expensive journeys and b) no chance of subsidy by the EU)
> was often ignored.
> 
> 
>> As I did not watch the stream, I cannot comment on this but in my
>> opinion it was not willingly that Wolfgang pointed the camera away, but
>> as I said I did not see the stream.
> 

We discussed it 5 months ago. It wasn't that it was deliberately pointed
away, so much as 'if you aren't physically present, we don't care about
you'. Reinforcing the EU-centric 'mindset' that pervades the PPI.

> 
> 
> The statutes were signed, but while a big deal was made and automatic
> acceptance by those who attended and signed there and then, others,
> including the US Pirate Party, are not so 'lucky'. We wanted to put the
> statutes to our members (and we said as much,
> publiclyhttp://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2010-April/006593.html
> <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2010-April/006593.html>),
> to make sure they approved of it, and since,
> due to an inability to get them out before the conference so we could do
> that, we put them to the membership the Tuesday AFTER the conference. It
> was approved and our notification of that was sent to the new PPI board
> within a few days. We still have not heard anything back. Let me make
> things perfectly clear. We (the US Party) had every intention of joining
> at the conference (we had remote delegates present), the only reason we
> couldn't is because the paperwork/documents that were supposed to be
> done BEFORE the conference (2 weeks before, by the original time-line)
> wasn't completed until DURING the conference. It's a bit hard to have
> members approval to join, when we don't have it until an hour before. Of
> course, we clearly weren't expected to join, because the signature page
> doesn't even list the US, *DESPITE US PARTY MEMBERS BEING AT THE
> CONFERENCE*
> 
> 
>> I did the signature page for the parties being present AND who did tell
>> me that they would sign at the conference OR who would send me
>> signatures via remote participation.
> 
>> The signature page was intended for those who would sign immediately, so
>> if this was not clear to the US Party or if this enraged you, I have to
>> apologize.
> 
>> I understand your anger about how the conference went, but I have to
>> tell you, I was not happy with everything and I would have done things
>> differently but it has to be clear that the PPI is a compromise between
>> all the expectations and restrictions different parties wanted to impose. 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, it gets better. Exactly what has the PPI been doing the last
> few months? I've not heard anything, I've not seen any open
> announcements of meetings, instead they're tucked away on the wiki
> (http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Board). The meetings themselves
> are a bit of a joke. Attendance by the board is usually low, and nothing
> is ever actually discussed.
> 
> 
>> I do not listen to the board meetings as I trust Jerry to inform me, and
>> he confirmed that attendance by board members is low, but I ask you what
>> are they allowed to do? The statutes do not foresee that the board can
>> exclude board members.

And who wrote them? One of the current chairmen was in charge of it, no?
Attendance is low, because there's no real point in attending. Why
bother turning up for "who is the next party of the week".

> 
>> Anyway, with the fact in mind, that they do not have money (except some
>> little donations) PPI is working, they are currently rolling out the PPI
>> press release exchange (parrot.pp-international.net
>> <http://parrot.pp-international.net>), furthermore they have an ACTA
>> taskforce working hard to prevent ACTA becoming reality

This the same ACTA taskforce which has been in existance for the last,
what, 9-10 months? And big whoop, again with the money. Welcome to how
many of the parties (outside the EU certainly) operate. The lack of
funding was known at the start (remember, one of the chairman was in
charge of this). Fianlly, hate to blow my own trumpet, but when I ran
it, solo, for 9 months, I had no money to do it, yet I somehow managed
to stay in touch with most of the parties. You don't need money to do a
basic job of communications.

> 
>> PPI is working on a new Identity or better a real Identity before
>> launching a new website which is already in planning stage.
> 

Which will be ready when, another 5-6 months? This is just like the
statutes. "it's cmoming, we're planning" and what we eventually get is
rushed, done last minute, and as you yoursef have pointed out, piss-poor
in content. It's like the procrastinating kid, who only does his
homework on the bus on the way to school, the morning it's due.

> 
> 
> We also recently got a call from their new 'PPI International
> coordinator'. Nice person, its a hard job (been there done that) and yet
> the information this poor person has been given by the board is
> outdated, or flat-out wrong. Silke was told there were 3 Pirate Parties
> in the US. There is only one. One, the 'American pirate party' was a
> reddit flash in the pan that never actually did anything, and died after
> 2 months of activity; the other was actually the subject of a number of
> PPI meetings late last year and earlier this year, and was dealt with.
> It seems reading it's own records is beyond the current board.
> 
> 
>> I have to say that I did not follow the USA issue closely so I cannot
>> comment.
> 
> 
> 
> I've also heard from others that there are whole lists of people in
> task-forces, that have been waiting for 'something to do', yet have been
> ignored by the board.
> 
> 
>> Which? I know from work to be done and nobody being available to do it...
> 

What work? I went back two months in the meetings and nothing about work
needing doing was mentioned (generally, in a competent organisation,
when work needs doing, you tend to include at least a monthly status
update), and I've gone back a few months on here, and I've noticed only
TWO requests for help. One for a translation task force 3 weeks ago
(what happened to the old one?), and one June 24th on 'best practices on
creating a party'

Not exactly overflowing with work.

> 
> 
> Boards are another thing that need mentioning, as the PPI forum is
> completely buried in spam. Despite 7 board members, and not actually
> doing anything (as evidenced by their own meeting minutes) they can't
> even keep a forum free of spam.
> 
> 
>> I do not think and there we probably disagree that it is the boards work
>> to keep a forum clean! I think that if the tech TF doesn't do it, then
>> we might need to find a dedicated forum mod.
> 

We have an organisation with no real activity, and with a board made up
of members who should not have any other party affiliations. Just how
many more people does it need? You're telling me that at the same time
as the board is not doing their jobs, they also need a tech
team/taskforce as well? I think we've found the problem. The board sees
everything as 'someone else's problem' and a job that needs a task force
to do the work for them. They (especially the chairmen) are apparently
incapable of rolling up their sleeves and doing some damned work. Let me
also remind you, as the board, they are ultimately responsible for the
PPI, and it's actions, or inaction. It's an area of inaction, and one
that reflects badly on PPI, and on the movement as a whole. That they
couldn't turn around and spend 20 minutes each once a week to clean it,
because they are 'above it, and it's the tech team's job' just shows how
detached, and to use a british phrase, "hoity toity" they are.

> 
> 
> It's a classic case of all around incompetence. Pirate Party
> International is anything but. Even as Pirate Party Europe it fails
> miserably. All it is, is 'Pirate Party of the week'
> 
> 
>> See my comments before, I disagree with this point
> 
I can't comment on secret plans they have, but don't bother to put in
their minutes, all I can comment on are their actual actions, and what
gets put into their official record. Good intentions are great, but the
board wasn't elected for having good intentions, they were elected to
ACT. They have NOT ACTED. They have done nothing.


> 
> 
> Let's just acknowledge what I'm sure we all probably know by now. PPI is
> dead. Those that were entrusted to run it, have either been completely
> inexperienced to deal with it, generally incompetent, or lazy. I would
> say let's sack them all, and get some new people in to run it, but I
> can't, because my party's membership still  hasn't been processed after
> 5 months (see above). And frankly, I'm not sure who'd be mug enough to
> take on the task. After all, if they've screwed up the basics like
> 'membership' and 'running a forum', how badly F***ed up are things like
> the legal documents that have to be submitted. Would anyone want to take
> the legal liability of taking over this clusterf**k - I certainly
> wouldn't.
> 
> 
>> Let's be blunt here, the mess was already there with a "de facto"
>> association with no statutes and a bank account with not known
>> liabilities before the conference and it was pointed out many times at
>> the conference (also by me) that we would need an organization to get
>> things running smoother. (and to get more legal protection for the board)
> 
The mess, who was head of that mess? "Co-President - Jerry Weyer / Jay"
of the coreteam, looks a lot like "Co-Chairman - Jerry Weyer / Jay" of
the board. I somehow don't think your point comes off too well in that
light.

> 
> 
> Jerry, Gregory, as 'co-chairmen' the balance of it falls upon the two of
> you, you're supposed to lead by example, and your leadership is clearly
> lacking. Joachim, as the chief administrator, you should have noticed
> this yourself. That you've not said anything mans you either didn't see
> it, or didn't want to make it public. Either way is bad. And Jakub,
> Bohomil, and Aleksandar, as board members, your job is to keep the board
> focused and working. As it hasn't, then you've not been fulfilling your
> role.
> 
> At present, PPI is a lame duck, a do-nothing organization that is
> supposed to do something. A organization of parties that could be
> replaced, at present, by one part-time blogger.
> 
> 
>> I do not agree that this is because of the board but because of statutes
>> which are a compromise between different opinions about PPI and I have
>> to repeat myself, this can be changed by the GA.

Thats right, the GA, which erm, meets once a year. The statutes, again,
happened the way they did, because it was organised by an incompetent,
using a piss-poor setup. That could never create workable results.

> 
> 
> 
> Back in April, there was a thread of messages here "The conference -
> what went wrong, and why we NEED to do better!"
> (http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2010-April/thread.html)
> and NOTHING has been taken from that.
> 
> 
>> If I may refer to your mail
>> (http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2010-April/006661.html)
>> nothing could have been done better in the meantime! Those are valid
>> points but are not possible to incorporate before the next conference.
> 
> 
> 
> Since there's no provision is the statutes for any form of board member
> removal (fancy that...) I make the following proposal to the board
> members.
> 
> 
>> Oh sorry I did not see this comment before beginning to answer and
>> dissect you message word by word ;) I pointed you to the same in my
>> answer...
> 
> 
> 
> Shape up, or Ship out!
> 
> I'll give you until October 18th. That's the 6 month anniversary of the
> much lauded 'founding'. Get everything into gear, do what you're
> SUPPOSED to be doing, or resign.
> 
> 
>> I would propose to give them until the first year anniversary before
>> restarting the entire thing which will lead in my opinion to new
>> problems where pirates internationally will have no common platform.

Yes, because giving them another 6 months to do nothing in will make a
world of difference. Here's something I've noticed in business: Those
that have done nothing in 6 months, won't do anything in 12 either. And
let's be blunt, if the best they can do in 6 months is some intentions,
and a 'party of the week', then what are we supposed to expect after 12?
A new website to be left abandoned? some sort of actual emails from the
board? Maybe a meeting where the whole board can be bothered to turn up?

If you think we have a problem that pirates internationally will not
have a common platform, then you've not really read the documents on the
PPI Wiki either. We do have a common platform, and it was even collated
in detail, 2 years ago, by Carlos.

> 
> This will anger some people, but frankly, the actions (or complete lack
> thereof) have angered me, and only the extremely naive would accept that
> hiding from the truth is acceptable - and if you are that naive,
> politics isn't for you.
> 
> 
>> I understand your anger but I think its not a lack of actions but more a
>> lack of communication which angers you.

No, lack of action, communication (which is, I guess more action), lack
of results, lack of anything really. Which is kinda the point.One of our
major problems with current governments and parties, is that they do t
heir own little thing, and are not accountable to the electorate. I
can't think of anywhere that describes better than the PPI Board. The
ONLY way to remove a board member, is for them to be defeated at
election; there is *no* other way. They are not accountable to anyone,
and this has caused this lack of activity.

Well, enough is enough. I actually care enough about this thing as a
whole, to hold them to account. I'm tired of excuses, I'm tired of
incompetence, and I'm tired of good intentions being accepted as a
substitute for actions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions,
and what's more, intentions do nothing, for nobody. The statutes don't
make no mention of good intentions, but does list several actions and
aims. These have been ignored for the last 5 months, and again, enough
is enough on it.

Stop settling for incompetence, Sven. You wouldn't want your party run
that way, and PPI is 'all of our' party. I can't bear to see it
bastardized any more, so, unlike our esteemed board, I'm actually doing
something about it.

> 
>> Sven Clement
>> Pirate Party Luxembourg



Enough is enough.

Andrew Norton
US PP Legal Officer


- -- 
Andrew Norton
http://ktetch.blogspot.com
Tel: (352)6-KTETCH [352-658-3824]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMoIKjAAoJECjjuYTW3X5HU5MIAMVpK/IN2RJ+FLs4sWr5GQXM
Dbonaf730kPdkgf9nkSwTjcnEOEynxWYa4AjJVR2HoIZqHH1K1q1m66CK2PHCveS
ETBPTGeWv1KxLYaz2+AqOqpYwJTuCZ7R11RI819jveH9gp3mruYw5yUzFJMM+GaD
wu6wEHP8Cj0AVUyNLC66d/sNLOWGich50lrbBACCXQ7teTsZfQ9aTEa4Nw95G/DU
5iMsJyFqwgoGHspX/euZVGwvxVNh5X2VpfOPjIjCwHda9c0ELuKnEA+KndMEy4gi
CElhseCBwVrl0EG41Pc0jgUjVNydY8VwOqoyEYdpzvt2mJ8UmjJsohWSR0Pe/Gg=
=MLOK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----