[pp.int.general] [RULING] 2012-5 (Validity of 2012 GA Conference)

[Zbigniew Łukasiak]

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Anouk Neeteson <jakobsheep at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrew, I (obviously) was also not there. I am naïve, so I (often without
> knowing) poke in mud and under the surface(s). I am again pleasently
> surprised with 1 an update and 2 you also show you can seperate one from the
> other. Emotion from the intellect, the individual from the group.
> I'm not sure how to say it but logic and honesty WILL make it succeed. The
> collective subconsience is finally moving into the collective conscience.
> The old ways of thinking are convulging even through our fellow pirates. I
> don't want to preach (another) new age retorics, but listening and looking
> around one can see things actually changing.
> The new revolution is going to be a 'silent' one. No destruction but
> carefully keep that what is good functioning, improve what needs to be and
> REPLACE what is wrong.
>
> Al the details are bollocks in the end if we can't change what needs to be
> changed before ANY PERMANENT change can take place. And that is replacing
> the lie of our so called Free West into true DIRECT democratie. And that can
> only happen with building trust and learning to communicate even better. In
> the end it is about the critical mass that true change will occur, and that
> countdown is about how many truly honest and empathic people coorperate in
> that spirit
>
> The technology is available, we only lack excercise/experience and unity.
>
> I know how to get united, but not all pirates understand freedom. There is
> NO TOTAL FREEDOM. Therefor must we define it. But that is a bridge too far
> because the 'uniting factor' of the pirate movement today is this undefined,
> by everybody differently perceived abstract 'freedom'
>
> Oh dear, does that mean......?
> Yes we need a set of moral guides/codes for the individuals how to
> coorperate and function. (like the netiquette)

Well in this particular case I think the rules are already quite well
established - things like not judging your own case, including in the
protocol everything that was said - not only what was said by some
priviledged part of the participants (to be fair I believe that remote
participation was asking for trouble), not changing rules at the last
moment and generally playing with the rules.  There are pretty basic
and very concrete things - I don't think you need to develop any
additional theory here.


Cheers,
Zbigniew


-- 
Zbigniew Lukasiak
http://brudnopis.blogspot.com/
http://perlalchemy.blogspot.com/