[pp.int.general] Invitation PPI Conference Paris 12th/13th of April

[Francisco George]

And all of this fuss because no one had the courage to declare the PRAGUE
GA *VOID*




2014-03-28 21:00 GMT+01:00 Andrew Norton <ktetch at gmail.com>:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 3/28/2014 2:43 PM, Nuno Cardoso wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Andrew Norton <ktetch at gmail.com
> > <mailto:ktetch at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Just as a point of order, isn't this a bit late?
> >
> >     Statutes say"
> >     (Statute IX(7) Meetings of the General Assembly will be announced at
> >     least five weeks prior to the meeting. The invitation will be sent
> out
> >     by the Board to all Members and published on the homepage of Pirate
> >     Parties International website."
> >
> >     it's now just over TWO, not 5.
> >
> >
> > FYI:
> >
> > "announcement" was made months ago when Paris was chosen, and you can
> > track the full history of that "announcement" as it is "published on the
> > homepage of Pirate Parties International website" here:
> >
> http://wiki.pp-international.net/wiki/index.php?title=PPI_Conference_2014&action=history
>
> Again, Nuno, There's quite a difference between 'announcement' "here is
> the event, it is here and now and all sorted" and "this is some stuff we
> haven't confirmed"
> And it was raised as a massive issue 2 years ago as well.
>
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2012-February/010977.html
> directly to a current board member.
>
> Again, your own board records show no planning even as recently as
> January. The date was quietly changed on that page in December.
>
> If you REALLY wanted to go that route, that the announcement was back in
> August (and actually, the only 'announcement' made was that a host city
> had been picked) Then the self-same 'announcement' is for an event
> happening next week.
>
> If you would like a comparison of what is generally considered an
> 'announcement', then why don't we try the notice send for the
> Friedrichshafen conference January 23/24 (depending on timezone) 2011, 6
> weeks before the event (its corrupt int he archive)
> Or
>
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2012-February/010851.html
> for the 2012 Prague one, more than 2 months early.
> Or
>
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/2013-March/013827.html
> for Kazan, sent 6 weeks in advance.
>
> There is certainly a pattern of "PPI officers make announcements to the
> list 6-8 weeks in advance to let us know details are set".
>
> You should know this, you were a board member for the last one, as was
> Denis, And Thomas was on the board for the previous one.
>
> There's NO WAY you can claim you didn't know about this, that it's some
> kind of new requirement.
>
> >
> > Furthermore, unlike you, I'm not a native English speaker but I still
> > know that the meaning of "invitation" (1
> > <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invitation>, 2
> > <http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/invitation
> >)
> > differs from that of "announcement" (1
> > <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/announcement>, 2
> > <
> http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/announcement
> >),
> > and the former one ("invitation") really has no associated time schedule.
>
> So, let's look at 'announcement:
> a public and typically formal statement about a fact, occurrence, or
> intention.
>
> How is slipping a few words onto a wiki page a 'public and formal
> notice'. While it may be publically accesable, it is not a 'public
> notice' (which generally has the requirement of copious conspicuousness
> - - in other words, we all know it's a notice, we are made aware of its
> existence, and that it is in a finished form.) nor can it be considered
> in any way 'formal' since it was subject to change without notice.
>
> I have to say, I certainly know how Arthur Dent feels:
> "But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office
> for the last nine months."
>
> "Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them,
> yesterday afternoon. You hadn't exactly gone out of your way to call
> attention to them, had you? I mean, like actually telling anybody or
> anything."
>
> "But the plans were on display ..."
>
> "On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar[wiki] to find them."
>
> "That's the display department."
>
> "With a flashlight."
>
> "Ah, well the lights had probably gone."
>
> "So had the stairs."
>
> "But look, you found the notice didn't you?"
>
> "Yes," said Arthur, "yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a
> locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the
> door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'."
>
>
> Had a government entity behaved like this to any of us, we'd be jumping
> up and down, writing press releases, and organising protests. Why do you
> consider it ok to do it to us? Hipocrisia não é bom.
>
> >
> > If you are not happy with the wording of that paragraph and find it of
> > ambiguous interpretation, the statutes XIVa(6) say you can ask the
> > "Court of Arbitration" who "may answer the preliminary questions of the
> > organs and individuals about the interpretation of the Statutes" but be
> > advised that "such answers act through their persuasiveness only", so
> > ultimately you can have a member file a statute amendment proposal to a
> > wording that is less confusing to you.
>
> I think most people find the wording very UN-ambiguous, but the
> convolutions used to try and justify things as less than honest.
>
> The honorable thing for the Board (and Maxime) to do would be to admit
> fault, that you screwed up, and deal with it. By refusing to admit
> responsibility, you (as a group) bring into question not just your
> integrity, but your honesty, ethics and basic suitability for any pirate
> position.
>
> >
> > Now that the issue is clarified I'l refrain from reading the rest of the
> > thread since I can read on the pirate map that "here be trolls mateys"
>
> Indeed, and they seem to be officers of the PPI, trolling the membership.
>
> Right now, I'm tired of the 'PPI Board' taking the P and leaving me just
> irate.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> >
> > Pirate regards,
> > Nuno
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________
> > 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 Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTNdTGAAoJECjjuYTW3X5H3GUH/3+vLfpcdUOlSaYwBF10SAe8
> S7cRfhnsdWFvEjjulXCoReuOlGzO84So2Bmr+QacsSPskJMaOgy3TJvPYyvMAw8H
> Vnt01eguMPLJAWl68L1ZiICmFTZsq3SzVadCXqmscCOGLn7nlOPCsD/0pRwBcUfS
> 7Cubi1c6wYmcw6mj6gl2GgEtLL1zrSOAsI9lFZxhKkKDiKsp28s+WXc+WWceh2lp
> r9FeiF1ThDyS6ohEtPdAZ1pycnCv6D4K72yXw2tsE264nk41q4wtx7DwdzlC3c+3
> O1RDsbVngrpmEfo4Xuo8dtCrWReffPhW8BExdFustKvewjL0bHlkGzXVCxhCUsg=
> =NxkK
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> ____________________________________________________
> 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/20140328/197dc18c/attachment.html>