Andrew, you have put the dot on the I.<br><br>A few short proposals to the board:<br>1. Rebuild the PPI site, making it a realtime information point fot the
pirates and press<br>2. Make a data repository with editable formats of all materials used by
PP's in their campaigns (editable graphics, texts, video), so the others
can use them.<br>3. Consider the eventuality to work with smaller regions on a more frequent schedule. Something like organising regular meetings between northeuropean pirates and sharing the experience with all the others. Its simpler that organizing a worldwide conference and it might be done with fewer resources.<br>
4. Take one step at a time. Do not aim to change the world tomorrow...aim for next year. :)<br><br>This alone will not solve the problems but will help on the way to that.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Message: 2<br>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 18:20:16 -0400<br>
From: Andrew Norton <<a href="mailto:ktetch@gmail.com">ktetch@gmail.com</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
I think the swedish losses are overstated. It's only to be expected<br>
given their membership model. Instead of looking at the negative<br>
numbers, look at the positive - how many, of their own will, have renewed?<br>
<br>
As for other parties, the Dutch party has a chance (0.67% is all they<br>
need for a national seat, I believe) and the UK party, while a seat is<br>
unlikely, has strong potential to grow some more in these last two weeks<br>
before the election.<br>
<br>
That reminds me, I'm not speaking officially for anyone but myself,<br>
however, one thing PPI should be doing is supporting parties during<br>
elections. The UK party is 2 weeks away from an elcetion. The Dutch<br>
party is a day under 7 weeks away from theirs. Sweden has an election in<br>
September, and I believe there's another one that I can't remembre<br>
offhand. The success of these parties, directly affects our own parties.<br>
The better the election results, the more credible we are as a political<br>
position.<br>
<br>
Additionally, I'm sure we're all shorter on experience (direct, hands on<br>
experience) than we'd like. So, why not get some. If you have free time,<br>
ask a party with a looming election if they need help. Mostly they'll<br>
need creative people, working on flyers, videos etc (because it's not<br>
feasible for someone in Spain, Sweden or Serbia to be helping trudge the<br>
streets of Bury handshaking and doorknocking). Maybe share, adapt and<br>
remix material you already have, and save some time, or free someone<br>
else up to do another job.<br>
<br>
THIS sort of thing, helping parties start and then helping them to work<br>
at their best, is what I envisaged as the whole reason for PPI. Not to<br>
set rules and policies or control who says and does what. We've been<br>
talking about who votes, and at the same time we say the PPI has no<br>
power to compel, so whats the votes for? As far as conferences go, we've<br>
had 5 over 3 years and almost everything agreed on at them has yet to<br>
happen. So let's take them back to their original purpose, as a social<br>
event, where we can put faces to (screen)names, and we can talk and<br>
learn from each other and from outside, invited speakers. Even the<br>
simple suggestion I made almost 18 months ago, that parties send PPI a<br>
copy of their press releases (or at last their important ones, including<br>
to the list) has gone mostly ignored in favour of vastly increasing<br>
bureaucracy.<br>
<br>
PPI isn't the UN and it's not the EP. Right now, we have a load of<br>
statutes, but it's all legal mumblings, it gives structure to an<br>
organisation that has no teeth, no ability for anything it decides to<br>
actually be carried out. The only purpose it has ever actually worked,<br>
has been as a central contact for new parties, and that can be better<br>
handled by a regional council, say a member per continent, and a<br>
president of same (giving 6 members and a tiebreaker voting president,<br>
since Antarctica won't have a party)<br>
<br>
In short, the job of PPI is, and always has been, supporting the<br>
formation of new parties, and supporting existing ones as and when<br>
needed, through increasing and facilitating communication. We're<br>
straying from that. I just had a quick look back through some of the<br>
coreteam meetings, and the vast majority of the topics over the last few<br>
months, have been about the conference, the statutes, and the bank<br>
account. I doubt there's been more than half a dozen issues over the<br>
last 4 months not related to the conference/establishment of PPI. Were<br>
Douglas Adams still alive, this could be the basis for "Bureaucracy 2"<br>
(Bureaucracy was a game he co-wrote in 87 about the difficulties with<br>
changing your address at a bank). Hmm, I guess not so short after all.<br>
<br>
Perhaps a metaphor would be best. To build a house, you need builders,<br>
they're essential for the house to be constructed. It requires plans,<br>
and organisation to build it, and hard work from the builders. We're at<br>
a situation now, though, where the builders are in a permanent state of<br>
work, even though the house is built, and they're not needed. Once it's<br>
biult, it needs a minimum of maintaince, the scaffolding can come down<br>
and be removed, and it needs only minor work done occasionally. We don't<br>
need the rules, we don't really need 'the board' as there is now nothing<br>
for them to do, since the original purpose was abandoned at some point,<br>
for the purpose of justifying its own existence. What does it do now,<br>
and more importantly, how do we get back on track?<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
<br></blockquote></div>