[pp.int.general] Who is running this LQFB?

[Andrew Norton]

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

On 1/17/2013 7:47 PM, Jelena Jovanovic wrote:
> With all due respect to your concerns regarding PPI board, allow me to
> say that this emailing make no sense, or makes only occasionally.  Which
> I really regret because I firmly believe nobody deserves it in any PP
> nor PPI.

I will admit his email didn't make any sense.
It's far more realisitc that a non-binding LQFB would be used as a
bellwether.
Plus, you can like the bits you like, and say 'democracy', ignore the
bits you dont ('non-binding!') and continually point to it as
'transparency, participation and integration'.

Also known as standard political distraction. "Ooh look, we have a
discussion forum/petition site! We clearly care!"

> 
> I would like to outline one thing only:  people who were standing for
> PPI board on GA 2012 and were not elected, together with people who are
> not ready to go to any GA which would be held outside their continent
> are bashing out PPI board on this list. 

so your argument was "This group is bitter, so their arguments don't
count, and this lot I don't know why they're complaining it's not like
they're complaining because the choice that benefits them didn't win.
How strange that take issue on principle, and not on personal gain"

As I said when you asked me about it a few days ago, I refuse to fly, AT
ALL. Until the TSA is gone. That is not just 'on this continent', it's
basically "anywhere that's not within 500km of Atlanta" that I wouldn't
go to. It's called PRINCIPLES. If I submit to a government search
without probable cause, for a reason that is more about control and fear
than any evidential reason; to go to a conference where one of the
underpinnings is about how bad that is, AND THERE IS ANOTHER WAY, then
submitting to the search seems unwarranted.

Nor, as I said at the time, am I alone, or just speaking for myself.
To characterize us thusly is disingenuous. Why do I think this will only
sink in when parties start quitting PPI? Is that when the Jobs-ian
reality distortion field will show some cracks? We can only see, as I
predict the first party quitting will be in the next few months, unless
something changes.
Didn't I hear somewhere that Tunisia declined to join PPI, joining the
african pirate party instead?

> 
> I would like to appeal to your rational behavior and to see some
> productive discussion*with proposals of what should be don*e instead of
> what's being done, or besides what's wrong with previous things board
> members were working on. 
> 
> This way I see only negativity and discussion for the purpose of itself. 

Maybe you're in the wrong party then? Part of politics is discussion for
the sake of discussion, in order to examine new ways to do things. When
you're afraid of discussion, you're insecure of your position.

> 
> We're trying to keep the PPI board without COA in care
> & maintenance mode until next GA where new COA will be elected. Please
> include your proposals so the discussion can start to make some sense,
> and pls stay away from /ad hominem/ attacks.

So, by your decision, a body that was formed to create some oversight of
the board, and deal with issues, you've decided to keep empty.

Is that an official statement of the board? Actually, in the name of
transparency, why don't the Board present an official statement on the
CoA, including what happened, it's present state, and your intentions? I
mean it's only been 4 months, it's not like it's something required by
the statutes, or providing accountability, or anything IMPORTANT like that.



Andrew



> 
> Best
> Jelena 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:20 AM, StreetDogg <streetdogg at gmx.net
> <mailto:streetdogg at gmx.net>> wrote:
> 
>     Am 17.01.2013 14:50, schrieb Nuno Cardoso:
> 
>         And if an issue to kill the association of LQFB with a PPI
>         domain URL is
>         what it takes to make LQFB haters use it, so be it, the irony
>         will be as
>         poetic and epic as ye olde tales of pirate adventures! Arrr!!! ;D
> 
> 
>     Yeah, right. Implement your own decision making process and demand
>     this process to be used to get rid of it again. Makes perfect sense.
>     Not.
> 
>     ______________________________________________________
>     Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>     pp.international.general at __lists.pirateweb.net
>     <mailto:pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
>     http://lists.pirateweb.net/__mailman/listinfo/pp.__international.general
>     <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
> 


- -- 
Andrew Norton
http://ktetch.co.uk
Tel: +1(352)6-KTETCH [+1-352-658-3824]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQ+KwjAAoJECjjuYTW3X5HZ9cH/jnk/kr6ShOL8WyEON0Exwwq
vehm9CVFfhjVV/x0AHGizPwVvm67fbqN5tNieCykfJHu0wzYaVMIC8G5I3yoziqv
gwmQIJIlwSuGiug1auDffMGnfSt9NazEyes6/qDXoYqlw+aTLhEPwSIv7fZ/syj3
4CqlfJUCUoX766MaJsWHSeR3xmMDrkTZM44ajWnKveidGNAOtO9o9GUNO3ZBP42T
n0ymC6svfCICuiva3i9Vi3t3LNsCxkq1bV72DkXkReL7/mgKActMx21MrmRiL6mu
wHnljPmVlkYtfnkXw58ANltN6hRsjpkLnf5zBC+bXPQGBoKkSmb0s0RwC8KnnhM=
=p/CQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----