[pp.int.general] PPI board meeting minutes and some updates about the conference.

Sun Mar 4 16:00:54 CET 2012

imho, neither of all spanish territory pirate parties should have vote,
even less after this deplorable spectacle where they all should be ashamed.

2012/3/4 Mozart <mozart.palmer at pirateparty.org.au>

> I like this suggestion:
>
> "I think one vote per country has worked quite well for PPI. In order to
> accomodate the situation in Spain I would suggest someone whom it is
> important to drafts an amendment of the PPI statutes that allows regional
> parties in exceptional circumstances to become ordinary members (maybe with
> only half a vote?) after the GA votes in favor of admitting that party as
> an ordinary member."
>
> But would say they should be given full vote when admitted. The situation
> in Spain does not seem to be working out at the moment, so a Pirate
> Confederation there is unlikely. They just don't seem to agree. And for
> now, PPES holds the Spanish vote I believe, even though PPCAT is a
> reportedly much larger party.
>
> Regards,
> Mozart.
>
> On 05/03/2012, at 12:19 AM, Justus Römeth wrote:
>
> Hola Isabela, hola rest of Galician parties
>
> While I understand the Galician/Catalonian position on this, and that
> circumventing the 1 voter per country makes totally sense for you, it just
> does not make sense from a German point of view:
> - Some local parties in Germany have more members than many national
> parties in other countries, going by member count alone is not a good
> starting point.
> - It is unlikely to happen in the near future, but if there is a rift
> within PPDE towards our position to PPI regional parties could start to ask
> for votes, too. Unless the other parties grow exceptionally by then this
> would 'allow' PPDE to 'swamp' PPI with regional/local parties if we
> institutionalize what you propose, bringing the rift within PPDE to PPI.
> - Even more problematic, an institutionalization of allowing regional
> parties into PPI could allow PPDE to effectively take over PPI if it would
> wish so. Not something I particularly would like to happen.
>
> So where does that leave us? The PPI rule of one country/one vote is
> obviously flawed when it comes to entities where it is unclear whether they
> are countries in our sense or not (Kosovo, Northern Cyprus, Flanders,
> Wallonia, and also Scotland are obvious examples). If you say that
> Catalonia and Galicia should get their own vote in PPI, why should Bavaria
> or Frisia not get one? But if they get one, why shouldn't Northern Frisia,
> the Sorbs, or Amsterdam (all entities that see themselves as somewhat
> different than the rest of their country), or Limburg and Lower Saxony (who
> see themselves as deserving the same rights as Bavaria and Friesland, since
> they are on the same political level within their country)?
>
> I personally am not a big fan of the organization of politics with the
> concept of nations (I am a German, but I don't quite understand why I
> should feel closer to someone in Munich compared to someone in Vienna,
> Berne, Luxembourg, Eupen, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Prague or Wroclaw). But I
> accept that this ambiguous concept is accepted by the vast majority of
> other people, that today's politics deal with this concept, that it is
> important to a lot of people, and that I won't be able to fundamentally
> change it.
>
> I think one vote per country has worked quite well for PPI. In order to
> accomodate the situation in Spain I would suggest someone whom it is
> important to drafts an amendment of the PPI statutes that allows regional
> parties in exceptional circumstances to become ordinary members (maybe with
> only half a vote?) after the GA votes in favor of admitting that party as
> an ordinary member.  (Maybe you could include non-opposition by the
> 'affected' national party, too). There is no guarantee that such an
> amendment would pass, however. This would then allow the members of PPI to
> decide on a possible Kosovarian PP when there is one, and not force them to
> make such a decision now.
>
> The more fundamental question is obviously whether there is a lot of use
> in having this discussion at all. Is an ordinary membership in PPI that
> important to PP-CAT and PP-GAL, keeping PPI's tasks and limitations in
> mind? Do PP-CAT and PP-GAL really disagree with PPES so much as far as PPI
> is concerned? Shouldn't this discussion instead focus on how we set up PPEU
> concerning national minorities (or at all), or how PPES could be reformed
> that it is not seen as such a big problem for the members of PP-CAT and
> PP-GAL?
>
> -J
>
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Kenneth Peiruza <kenneth at pirata.cat>wrote:
>
>>  Hi Isabel,
>>
>> It would be great to see some Galician Pirates in the forthcoming GA.
>> Please think about it! There's going to be 6 PP-ES delegates and 4 PP-CAT
>> delegates there, so, we can have a nice time with a lot of Pilsen beer :)
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kenneth
>>
>>
>> On 04/03/12 10:59, Isabel Fernández wrote:
>>
>> Hello Justus,
>>
>> We don't think PPI's job regulate between pirates parties either. That's
>> why we said we'll declare nothing of the sort.
>>
>> Our suggestion was based on the premise 'one legal territorial pirate
>> party - one vote' that we think it's a more fair than the actual
>> situation. We think PPI could give it some thought to this issue.
>>
>> We'd love to send a delegate to the GA, but rumours are saing that we'll
>> face elections next autumn at Galician Parlament and still there's a lot
>> work to do... we're not sure we can attend to Prague. Generally rumours
>> on this subject turn out to be true at the end. Maybe next time we are
>> able to send Galician Delegation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Isabel Fernandez.
>>
>>
>> On 03/03/12 10:51, Justus Römeth wrote:
>>
>>  Thank you Isabel (and the rest of PP-GAL),
>>
>> I don't think PPI's job is to regulate between individual pirate parties,
>> but rather to keep the movement growing, by providing infrastructure and a
>> place to meet for pirates who's country does not have a PP, and by helping
>> them through the early stages of forming a party. Therefore I don't think a
>> model that would give PPDE ~20 times as much voting power as the next
>> biggest party (PPSE is still not a member) would be appropriate.
>>
>> That is not to say that the current model of PPI concerning the situation
>> in Spain is optimal. It is not. I think your proposed solution would make
>> sense for something like PPEU, or a PPI with a much broadened scope (as
>> well as institutions like the EP, but that is a different matter). As of
>> yet I don't see the latter happening, however.
>>
>> Are you (PP-GAL) planning to send a delegate to the General assembly in
>> Prague?
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Justus
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 3:09 AM, HerNenya <isabel.fdez at mundo-r.com> <isabel.fdez at mundo-r.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>  I do apologize since last message was my first mail to this list. I'm
>> not used to deal w/ digests.
>>
>> I repeat the message for better reading.
>>
>> Best Regards to all,
>>
>>
>> Isabel Fernandez.
>> -----------------------------------------------
>>
>> This is a message made by the members of public relations team for
>> PP-GAL. It is agreed by all the members of mentioned team and we want to
>> send it through our link in this mailing list of PPI members so it must
>> be understood in the name of PP-GAL party and not from the sender who
>> forwards this message.
>>
>> Since there were direct references to PP-GAL in this list and the way we
>> organize ourselves in Spain, we consider it is important to be heard in
>> our oppinion before of the rest of pirates parties of the world.
>>
>> First of all, we would like to say we are 2 months old as a political
>> party in Spain and our foundation is based on the structure of Spain as
>> a country formed by autonomies as such established in the Spanish
>> Constitution Act [1] in article #148 in order to organize ourselves in
>> the Spaniard territory. Moreover we have our own idiosyncrasy as
>> language and culture quite different from other spaniard territories.
>> Therefore we are an approved political party by the competent Ministry
>> with same rights and duties as PP-ES and PP-CAT.
>>
>> As Kenneth from PP-CAT said in other previous message, we are
>> encouraging a confederation at country level to organize common tasks
>> that affect us as a nation such the cases of #megacomplaint and
>> #opColapso (fighting against Sinde-Wert law [2]) that we are supporting
>> PP-ES, PP-CAT and PP-GAL. Last week we have created a mailing list
>> called pirata-34 to discuss those affairs.
>>
>> Regarding the subject about who can vote as a country or by the amount
>> of pirate members, we consider system of countries is not fair precisely
>> because of proportion of the population densities and pirates members. A
>> possible fair solution (as a suggestion) to this matter could be that
>> depending on the number of members from each pirate party, each party
>> will provide a proportional amount of the contingency fund of PPI, as
>> well, each party would have the proportional weight in PPI decisions.
>>
>> Refering to mentions about how to organize internally the different
>> pirate parties in Spain, we considered that this mailing list is not the
>> appropiate place to discuss about it, so we are not going to declare
>> anything here.
>>
>> [1] http://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/IDIOMAS/9/Espana/LeyFundamental/index.htm
>> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ley_Sinde
>>
>>
>> Public Relations Team of PP-GAL.http://piratasdegalicia.org/web/
>>
>> --
>> Isabel Fdez
>> GPG EA63DF8E
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talkpp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.nethttp://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>
>>  ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talkpp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.nethttp://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talkpp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.nethttp://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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20120304/480c82c6/attachment.html>