<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><div style="font-family: verdana,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">----- Mensaje original ----<br>De: Max Lalouschek | Piratenpartei Österreichs <max.lalouschek@ppoe.or.at><br>Enviado: martes, 1 de julio, 2008 2:46:33<br>> Greetings from one of the Austrian delegation.<br><br>> As Pirate Parties are preparing for European Parliament Elections and time is running out right now, there finally had to<br>> be a starting point somewhere. I would say that there is plenty of time for creating a Manifesto and it should NEVER be<br>> mixed up with a Pirate's Manifest. The text presented here is a common agreement draft for the upcoming election<br><br>It's right the opposite thing. Before writing a platform, we should have clear our common points; because each pirate party, while sharing
common basic points, has lots of nuances in its stances. Making a platform before making the manifesto is, apart from violating the Berlin agreements, start building a house from the roof. And talking about Berlin, am I guilty for having received almost no help in the development of Pirate Manifesto? Only Wybo in the beginning, Amelia in some moments, and some months later Matthias (PPOE) and Helmut (PPD) contributed; that means less than half of EU pirate parties.<br><br>So the solution is not violating commitments, but sticking to them and having the will to develop some hard work.<br><br>> Also, it makes no sense blaming Sweden, especially Marten. Actually if I've had access to my mail account, I would<br>> have sent that "declaration" to the int. mailing list, as I was the last one putting all results from the discussion groups<br>> together. So, anybody who blames Marten might as well blame me.<br><br>Ok, thus if you're co-responsible for
suggesting that we have to <span style="font-weight: bold;">abandon our ideological neutrality and surrender to a traditional parliamentary group <span style="text-decoration: underline;">for nothing</span></span> -have you read 2006 Piratpartiet Valmanifest? They're willing to support any party even if the supported party doesn't give back support to our core issues- ... then of course I'm gonna blame you too.<br><br>> However, that already explains how the text has been made. By discussion groups, made out of 6 different countries.<br>> The issues-group didn't even find much to agree on the first day, so we re-discussed the major issues on the next and<br>> final day.<br><br>Yes, a truly <span style="font-weight: bold;">shame</span>. You read it well, a shame. Let's compare both Pirate Manifesto's procedure with Uppsala Declaration:<br><br>- Pirate Manifesto: representatives from <span style="font-weight: bold;">all</span> PPI members
developing a first draft; then <span style="font-weight: bold;">all</span> PPI <span style="font-weight: bold;">individual members</span> -directly or proxied through their national parties (to make the process easier and achievable)- <span style="font-weight: bold;">amending the first draft</span> to have a second draft; and finally each pirate party signing it<br><br>- Uppsala Declaration: representatives from roughly <span style="font-weight: bold;">half</span> of PPI members -6 of 9 from EU scope, 6 of 11 from worldwide scope- decide a text <span style="font-weight: bold;">without consulting their parties</span>; even, some of the participants -e.g., finnish which I've talked to in IRC and mail- disagree with the idea of unconditionally surrender our vote in non-core issues to greens, communists, liberals, right-wing, or whatever else.<br><br>Are you truly legitimating such an important text -we are talking about PPI's platform, for (put whatever
you believe in)'s sake!- because of the way it has been developed? Let's gonna be serious, please; we didn't wrote Pirate Manifesto in Berlin -we only set some rules for its development- because it's not expected a meeting like Uppsala or Berlin -without rules, without clear delegation system, without any basis- to be the proper place to make such important texts; it may be, at most, a place to sign those texts.<br><br>> We tried to be as general as possible, as well as making compromises. I guess we all tried to be realistic. It was clear,<br>> that in this short time, there wouldn't be a possibility to create a perfect text but rather a draft. BUT at least something<br>> wich finally showed SOME KIND of common agreement of many European pirate parties, regarding the upcoming <br>> European Parliament elections 2009.<br><br>Even if it's a draft -it doesn't seem for Amelia and Marten to be a draft, as Marten said that <span
style="font-style: italic;">someone</span> had "<span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">finalised</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> a European Pirate Parties Declaration of a basic plattform for the European Parliaments election of 2009</span>" (no trace of the D word, but Marten talking about a finalised text)-, we in PIRATA can't hardly believe in how such thing -giving our vote in non-core issues for nothing- could be agreed in Uppsala.<br><br>> I thought that there would be disagreement, but that's the nature of such texts. Actually I would have wondered if,<br>> especially those countries which didn't attend would have fully agreed.<br><br>It's right the opposite: if it's a common platform, it has to be a platform which all of us can feel comfortable with, and tell everyone "<span style="font-style: italic;">that's <span style="font-weight: bold;">our</span> platform</span>". The only thing we can say about it is: "<span
style="font-style: italic;">that's a <span style="font-weight: bold;">suicidal</span> platform</span>" -as long as it keeps including such EP strategy-.<br><br>> However, as Amelia wrote, mailing lists are not suited for such complicated discussions. I think a forum might be<br>> better suited.<br><br>Which forum? The pp-international.net forum gives me this error: "<b style="font-style: italic;">Fatal error</b><span style="font-style: italic;">: Allowed memory size of 16777216 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 16 bytes) in </span><b style="font-style: italic;">/opt/webservices/ppi/www/forum/db/mysql4.php</b><span style="font-style: italic;"> on line </span><b style="font-style: italic;">235</b>", so I would be pleased if anyone leads me to another one. The place -mailing list or forum- doesn't really matter to PIRATA, the only thing that matters to PIRATA is to avoid the disaster -surrender to a traditional group means self-destruction, Spanish
United Left is the live (not for much time) example- and to claim a more elaborate process, like also Anton Taaminen suggested.<br><br>> Again, I emphasise to NOT mix up this text with the Manifesto attempt.<br><br>It has to be mixed. Making the platform before making the Manifesto is to start building the house from the roof.<br><br>> As far as I see these two things are completely different, the elections are already next year and there is hardly any<br>> time to have at least some kind of common agreement, while there is plenty of time for creating the manifest, which<br>> will take much longer to create<br><br>There were plenty of time 5 months ago for creating the manifest, and we would have achieved it if you all, folks, had contributed to it. It's quite easy to say "<span style="font-style: italic;">we cannot wait for a manifesto</span>" while disallowing its development.
Regards,<br><br><br> Carlos
Ayala<br> ( Aiarakoa )<br><br> Presidente de la Junta Directiva Nacional de PIRATA<br></div></div><br>
<hr size=1><br><font face="Verdana" size="-2">Enviado desde <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mailuk/taglines/isp/control/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=52431/*http://es.docs.yahoo.com/mail/overview/index.html">Correo Yahoo!</a><br>La bandeja de entrada más inteligente.<br></font></body></html>