[pp.int.general] court of arbitration (bridge building)

[Brendan Molloy]

Thomas, we did make it clear what was wrong and how we would like to see it
improved. Look back through this thread for an email for me which was a
forwarding of a joint email of the Canadian, NZ, Australian and Portuguese
parties.

I'm not specifically asking the current court to be considered void, I want
a guarantee that this kind of a fuck up will never occur again.

2011/3/24 Thomas Bruderer <apophis at apophis.ch>

> There are at the moment different discussions all involving the court of
> arbitration:
>
> 1.) The proceedings in general, yes it was not perfect. Especially the
> Leading of the second day was very poorly done. I was also very disappointed
> by his proceedings and the ignorance of proper procedure, however there was
> no complaint as far as I know which was directed directly at this. It was
> completly inappropriate that the candidates had no ability to present
> themselves, and it was done in a hurry. I support the remote voters in that,
> however on the counting side we really tried to give you all the information
> we had. The election was ad-hoc, also the parties present have not planned
> much.
>
> 2.) Remote votes and voting secret: I was counting the votes on site. There
> was no voting secret for the amandement changes, there was a kind of voting
> secret for the elctions, and STV was criticised already before. There are
> pro and cons for open and secret votings. this discussion is interesting in
> a general sense.
>
> 3.) Cryptopgraphic remote voting: It is possible to make it verifiable AND
> secret, but its not that easy. We do it in switzerland with our own software
> (OSS). Every election or vote is a compromise. STV is a compromise. Voting
> on a paper is a compromise. We need a solution which fits our purpose best.
> Please consider that the PPI conference is young and everyone involved makes
> mistakes. Propose better solutions for the future, which are suitable to our
> case.
>
> 4.) The vote on the court of arbitration shall be void: Sorry, thats not
> possible. There have been mistakes, and I am sure we could have done it
> better. Its not like they will do big decision and its not the board. So
> please calm down. It might be eurocentric, as the whole organisation
> sometimes is. But it's not bad intention! The Court of arbitration has
> memebrs from 7 different countries, its a good choice for an arbitration
> court. Can we settle this without starting a little war. We have better
> things to do than fighting about the representation in the court. In One
> year everybody will know that there is a court of arbitration and can
> prepare their candidates. I am sure everyone will have an equal chance to
> get elected.
>
> 5.) Other continents: I hope everyone understood that you felt not taken
> seriously, please make a proposal how to do it better. You are the ones who
> know how bad it was and what needs to be improved. The PPI can only improve
> if we know what goes wrong. Mistakes are part of life, lets learn from them.
>
> And now both sides. Try to imagine the other sides point. The critics are
> sometimes rather harsh and not to the topic, I know there are personal
> tensions in PPI, we are not a uniform mass - but to be strong we need to
> concentrate on the issues, and how to solve them. It's not the time to fight
> personal wars and blame the rest.
>
> Andrew: could you live with the current Court of Arbitration? Can we agree
> that it was not done properly and should have been done differently - but
> that we should not change an election ex post facto?
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>



-- 
Regards,
Brendan Molloy
Pirate Party Australia

M: +61 434 069 776
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20110324/f02fdb9b/attachment.html>