[pp.int.general] Questions to PPI Board from PPNL.

[internationaal at piratenpartij.nl]

Prior to the upcoming online GA the Dutch Pirate Party has several 
questions it would like answered.
Most of these can be answered succinctly in yes / no or a link to the 
relevant pages, and it would be much preferred if they were answered 
thus.

1) We would like to know how PP-DE's international co-ordinator annex 
board member procured the motion to alternative medicine. Though 
partially answered in the recent piratetimes article, we would like 
these answered for clarity.
1.1) If this motion is part of PPDE's program and is explicitly 
supported by PPDE (or an individual idea of PPDE international 
coordinator.)
1.2) And if so, where we can find this in the program, and the 
proceedings by which this position on alternative medicine was reached.
1.3) If not, why this motion is on the international agenda.
1.4) Lastly, why PPDE thinks such a subject should be internationally 
upheld by pirate parties, as pirate parties can advocate information 
politics perfectly well without, or even on a contradictory stance to 
alternative medicine.
1.5) Bluntly put: Why does PPDE feel that with all the recent commotion 
regarding its board members, that this policy subject has enough 
priority that is must be taken care of on this online GA, while at the 
same time there seems no time for discussing structural problems in ppi.

2) We have seen several board members bringing in complaints and grounds 
for removal against one another. We would like clarified:
2.1) Which board members have been thus indicted.
2.2) And where the formal complaints are to be found.
2.3) As well as any ruling by the CoA on these matters.

3) The board has refused to accept PPAU's departure of PPI pending a 
formal letter which PPAU has no intention of sending on grounds of 
principle. Clarification is requested on:
3.1) If indeed this is the sole ground for refusing to acknowledge their 
departure.
3.2) If not, what other grounds exist to contest this fait accompli.
3.3) What is accomplished by refusing their departure on this ground?
3.4) How the board sees this impasse resolved.
3.5) Most importantly, why is the format/style of the resignation the 
primary concern instead of the fact ppau wants to leave?

4) We note that the Australian proposal for an online assembly have been 
ignored in favour of a mumble meeting type of proceeding.
4.1) On what grounds were these RoP preferred?

5) It has come to our attention that the new bank account of PPI is 
actually PP-LU's. We would like to have clarified:
5.1) If indeed this new account is on the name of PPLU.
5.2) And if it is PPI or PPLU who ultimately holds the keys.
5.3) If the previous PPI account is salvaged, or lost.
5.4) If PPI has a bank account on it's own name.

P.S. German board added in bcc with regards to question 1.