<a href="http://bit.ly/S36Cv4">http://bit.ly/S36Cv4</a><br><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Antonio Garcia <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ningunotro@hotmail.com" target="_blank">ningunotro@hotmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div dir="ltr">
(sorry for the missing capital letters in the text that follows, they are under embargo pending assessment of a received threat)<br><br>we are already breaking apart... out of sheer incompetence, movementwide.<br><br>the critical mass of this collective's collective unconscience is almost permanently established, and logic, ethic and the rule of law are only secondary to the direction in which the ad-hoc majority at any time decides to fart. More decisively so in any simulacre of a general assembly.<br>
<br>it becomes very unrewarding to stay true to the supposed core values of the movement when it shows at any time that the majority is absolutely unconscient about them in the best of cases, or willingly does not give a damn, and abiding by the rules only seems to be a handicap for those who still appreciate some.<br>
<br>i'm still awaiting any kind of argumented response to the facts and reasoning exposed in the following mail sent to the court of arbitration:<br><br><br>> On 05/24/2012 06:03 PM, Antonio Garcia wrote:<br>> > <br>
> > Hi Maxime!<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Dissenting opinion<br>> > <br>> > Maxime Rouquet : Considering the initial meaning of the statutes was to<br>> > prevent multiple Ordinary Members in a given state, and encouraging the<br>
> > cooperation inside a Federation (in article VI of the statutes), I think<br>> > we should not have accepted Pirate Party of Catalonia as an Ordinary<br>> > Member without having changed and clarified what exactly we meant by the<br>
> > word "country", and made it sure Pirate Party of Catalonia and Pirate<br>> > Party of Spain cannot work together inside a federation.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Thanks for having the guts to speak up.<br>
> > <br>> > <br>> > As you can imagine, we here at the Spanish Pirate Party have not been<br>> > pleased at all to see what a fuck of a subterfuge the CoA has used to<br>> > turn down the badly formulated complaint of PP-UK. We're having trouble<br>
> > not forcing Arturo Martinez to walk the plank ;) , and hang the rest of<br>> > the Court for High Treason.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > As you know, the situation with Pirates de Catalunya is really tricky...<br>
> > they even dared blackmail the whole Assembly and in particular Thomas<br>> > Gaul when they threathened to derail the PPI GA and make a real scandal<br>> > before all the international press gathered at the venue for the<br>
> > occasion... less than a month before two crucial elections in Germany.<br>> > We in Spain acknowledge that Thomas did what was within his powers to<br>> > resist while risking that scandal.<br>> > <br>
> > <br>> > Here in Spain, many PIRATA people fear a direct confrontation with<br>> > Pirates de Catalunya, because they do not hesitate to use dirty tricks<br>> > and talk themselves out of adverse situations with the conversation<br>
> > skills of the few real demagogues and propaganda people that form their<br>> > inner core, and as not many of our people are experienced enough to<br>> > withstand their insistence and intimidation tactics.<br>
> > <br>> > <br>> > Anyway, it was trying to minimise bad impact for PPI and PP-ES that I<br>> > devised the strategy of tactically voting, in a very explicit way (thank<br>> > you Slim Amamou for being very smart and tweeting the good picture) in<br>
> > favour of the full membership of Pirates de Catalunya to the PPI.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > The rationale being that our one vote was not going to be of any real<br>> > use if there was not a clear majority for or against the proposition and<br>
> > could even become very problematic at home if it came close of being the<br>> > tie breaker for the decision. So, we figured out that if there was a big<br>> > majority in favour of letting PP-Cat in as full member, our negative<br>
> > vote would be worthless anyway, and if there were a big majority against<br>> > it then our positive vote would not matter either. If it were a tie then<br>> > there is a bigger problem in PPI than this single issue anyway. So we<br>
> > used our vote to do Public Relations and gain us some goodwill as the<br>> > ones that were not making things worse for everybody. At the same time<br>> > we explained to everyone we could talk to without our Catalan brethren<br>
> > eavesdropping why the situation was that difficult, why we were playing<br>> > it smart, and all the good reasons why they should not forget to vote NO<br>> > to full membership of PP-Cat.<br>> > <br>
> > <br>> > Well, you know how things went... the very improvised way.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I did not care that much, because I knew that the Statutes changes that<br>> > had to create the structure for it to be possible to have two full<br>
> > members per country had not been voted upon, so a simple complaint to<br>> > the CoA should suffice to void the Australian motion and its results.<br>> > PP-UK did the right thing, albeit judging from the results in a quite<br>
> > clumsy way. It'd be great to have the complaint text and the records of<br>> > the deliberations, to have some fun ;) .<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > The way they arranged to reinterprete the meaning of the word country to<br>
> > grow us a new Gibraltar in Spain is exhilarating and caught us a little<br>> > bit by surprise, I'm afraid... instead of jumping PP-Cat out (although I<br>> > heard the option of jumping PP-ES out was even more funny), they split<br>
> > the country to make there be two of them!<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Really funny.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Anyway, everybody has had its time to be funny, now it's time for the<br>
> > really serious stuff.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > In accordance with the CoA Rules of Procedure section about Anonymous<br>> > complaints as stated:<br>> > <br>
> > <br>> > <a href="http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_CoA/Rules_of_Procedure" target="_blank">http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_CoA/Rules_of_Procedure</a> <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Anonymous complaints<br>
> > <br>> > Anybody can contact either the Court of Arbitration or one of its member<br>> > by the channel of his choice to issue a complaint about the functioning<br>> > of the PPI or the PPI by itself, provided they are suspected of a<br>
> > violation of the PPI Statutes, of the Pirate Party movement core values,<br>> > or would be victims of such a suspected behaviour.<br>> > The Court of Arbitration then decides whether the claim seems<br>
> > well-grounded, and if so can initiate an own intended procedure without<br>> > the need of disclosing the identity of the complainant. This decision is<br>> > sent to both the complainant and the PPI officers, organs or members the<br>
> > complaint is referring to, and is subject to the same time limits<br>> > applied to regular complaints.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > I choose you as the member of my choice to present the following<br>
> > complaint about the CoA ruling 2012-3 that resulted in the admittance of<br>> > PP-CAT as a full member of PPI in such a way as to constitute a breach<br>> > of the Statutes as 1) Proper procedure for the admittance of a new full<br>
> > member was not respected; 2) Spurious interpretation of the meaning of<br>> > the word "Country" was used insofar as only the existence of dubious<br>> > significance in the dictionaries was used as an argument, and the facts<br>
> > and occurrence of the word was not checked against the historical facts<br>> > and context when these Statutes were crafted (none of the founding<br>> > members had trouble nor could or did foresee it emerging related to<br>
> > multiple Pirate Parties existing in one of their single countries, as it<br>> > happening is antithetical to genuine Pirate Core Values, so in their<br>> > context COUNTRY meant as they all were... Sovereign Nations); 3) The<br>
> > Honourable Court of Arbitration permitted herself to twist the real<br>> > wording of Section III Paragraph (4) of the Statutes to grant the<br>> > Assembly seemingly unrestricted decision powers as to the admittance of<br>
> > new members, in order to take for granted the validity of the Motion<br>> > presented by the Australian Pirate Party, whereas that paragraph only<br>> > grants discretional powers to decide whether "AN APPLICANT" that has<br>
> > duly submitted his candidature papers and fulfilled al requisites shall<br>> > be granted the status they ASKED FOR or the other possible one. As I say<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>
> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Dear Maxime,<br>> > <br>> > As we have never spoken to eachother, let me please introduce myself<br>> > before we start talking. My name is Antonio García and I am one of the<br>
> > delegates that represented the Spanish Pirate Party in the 2012 PPI GA.<br>> > <br>> > <a href="https://yfrog.com/gzy0wyclj" target="_blank">https://yfrog.com/gzy0wyclj</a><br>> > <br>> > I'm the one voting ;) .<br>
> > <br>> > I do still not know what the PPI thinks about Pirates de Catalunya,<br>> > <br>> > though I can imagine you got a better picture of them now you had to<br>> > <br>> > face their irresponsible behaviour and outright blackmail at the end of<br>
> > <br>> > the GA when they realised they were not going to get what they longed<br>> > <br>> > for.<br>> > <br>> > Believe me, I felt sorry for everyone while I saw them trying to<br>
> > <br>> > maneuver in such a way as to not to ruin the PPI GA with a scandal in<br>> > <br>> > front of all the german press that was attending, less than a month before<br>> > two crucial local elections in Germany were due.<br>
> > <br>> > I spent more money I could afford to just make sure I'd be there<br>> > instead of any of the other possible candidates from Pirate Party<br>> > Spain, because I knew some of the alternative candidates that might<br>
> > have gotten elected otherwise and as they are young and inexperienced<br>> > I could not trust them to behave properly and not ruin the PPI GA.<br>> > <br>> > The situation in Spain of the Pirate Parties (both of them, no, all<br>
> > three of them ;) ) is very bad, as far too many of their members are<br>> > quite young and rather the Anonymous and free-loader kind of people<br>> > that only thinks about having fun or getting some benefit while they<br>
> > "play" politics. Pirates de Catalunya has a very strong "separatist"<br>> > membership and following they cater for, something that does not<br>> > really fit within the Pirate Ideals, and all they are doing at the<br>
> > moment is manoeuvring to get their candidate on the n° 1 spot in the<br>> > 2014 European elections through a Confederated candidature they may<br>> > break loose from very easily if we get one Catalan elected MEP. That<br>
> > is why they are not happy with the fact that the actual PPI statutes<br>> > requires the plural membership formula to be a Federation and they<br>> > submitted amendments to the PPI Statutes in that sense. They also want<br>
> > full membership because the idea they have is to destroy the Spanish<br>> > Pirate Party by starting a Confederation of Spanish Pirate Parties<br>> > where they are encouraging other regions to form their Pirate Party<br>
> > too, and the more people follow their ideas the more regions of Spain<br>> > would get barred for the Spanish Pirate Party... until it vanishes as<br>> > all territories get their own Pirate Party and the Confederation<br>
> > agreements stipulate that no two parties shall compete electorally in<br>> > the same territory.<br>> > <br>> > You have seen Kenneth Peiruza at work in the PPI GA. If they favour<br>> > Direct Democracy it is solely because they are a few demagogues and PR<br>
> > people who think that they will be the more able to get the upper hand<br>> > in whatever dialectical dispute may arise in a group where most of the<br>> > participants are rather passive. You say how they played on the<br>
> > feelings and primary instincts of the Assembly, not caring what they<br>> > risked as a scandal for the PPI and the negative fallout for PP-DE.<br>> > <br>> > My personal strategy for the PPI GA 2012 was to avoid as far as<br>
> > possible any possible direct confrontation that might give the PPI and<br>> > the Pirate Movement bad publicity. That is why I engaged personally<br>> > with the delegates to the GA and explained the situation to them. I<br>
> > told them that the Pirate Party of Spain would be strategically voting<br>> > in FAVOUR of the full membership of PP-CAT in order to minimise<br>> > animosity between the two Spanish Pirate Parties both at the PPI GA<br>
> > and at home, because our ONE vote would anyway be useless, and<br>> > conflictive if it were a tie breaker, if no clear majority was either<br>> > for or against full membership of PP-CAT, but that we believed that<br>
> > full membership of PP-CAT to PPI would open a Pandoras' Box whose<br>> > consequences for PPI would be hard to estimate, and that they should<br>> > vote massively against it and do themselves a favour.<br>
> > <br>> > But they managed to push for a vote playing with the feelings of the<br>> > delegates rather than their intelligence, and that is what we could<br>> > not avoid because it is very hard to counter irresponsible mass dynamics.<br>
> > <br>> > Anyway, I do not know how many Pirate Parties were exactly accredited<br>> > for participation, nor what the voting threshold is for validly<br>> > accepting new full members... but they got 8 positive votes (mine<br>
> > included of course), 3 negative votes and not less than 5 abstentions<br>> > (plus any accredited party that did not even bother to state anything).<br>> > <br>> > First, I'd say I do not know if 8 votes, while constituting a majority<br>
> > result for the motion are sufficient quorum to get the PP-CAT full<br>> > <br>> > membership status through that vote.<br>> > <br>> > I stayed very calm, because I knew that it did not matter... the<br>
> > Statutes had not been amended to make room for more than one full<br>> > member per country, so I only had to wait until somebody complained<br>> > because of this to the CoA and the decision resulting from that motion<br>
> > would have to be undone.<br>> > <br>> > PP-UK presented such a claim to the CoA, so all was well. I was<br>> > contacted by caring pirate colleagues from other Pirate Parties asking<br>> > whether they could be of any help, and I contacted the CoA who told me<br>
> > that additional evidence would not be needed. Of course I believed it,<br>> > as I was convinced of that myself. But then, the CoA published its<br>> > very crafted decision playing with the meaning of the word "country"<br>
> > to make it as if Spain were two countries and each Pirate Party was<br>> > the one full member of his own country (plain bullshit of course ;) )<br>> > and we are thus in trouble still. They did not give the Spanish Pirate<br>
> > Party (as an affected country that got the seccession of part of its<br>> > territory decreed by a foreign tribunal ;) ) a fair chance to defend its<br>> > <br>> > position on this issue during the trial.<br>
> > <br>> > That is a first important point.<br>> > <br>> > But there is more... the CoA, presumably on purpose, or by sheer<br>> > incompetence, did cite and instrumentalize part of the PPI statutes<br>
> > wrongly. They argumented in ruling 2012-3 of may 15th:<br>> > <br>> > "9) Considering Section III, paragraph (4) of the Pirate Parties<br>> > International Statutes states that the General Assembly can grant, at<br>
> > its own discretion, the status of Ordinary Member or the status of<br>> > Observer Member."<br>> > <br>> > And this is an too simplified interpretation of what that section and<br>> > paragraph of the PPI Statutes state, who literally says:<br>
> > <br>> > (4) The General Assembly is authorized to grant, at its own<br>> > discretion, the applicant one of the following Member status in Pirate<br>> > Parties International<br>> > <br>
> > a) Ordinary Member<br>
> > b) Observer Member<br>> > <br>> > And are to be understood as a direct and related following to the<br>> > preceding point:<br>> > <br>> > (3) Requests for Membership shall be submitted in writing to the Board<br>
> > at least four weeks before the meeting of the General Assembly. They<br>> > shall include contact information and a statement on the adoption of<br>> > the statutes and internal regulations of the Pirate Parties<br>
> > International, in addition to a copy of the statutes and by-laws and<br>> > the political program of the applicant and information on the<br>> > background and organization of said applicant. The Board will transmit<br>
> > the application to all Members at least two weeks before the meeting<br>> > of the General Assembly.<br>> > <br>> > There is another point in the statutes that says something more<br>> > similar to what the CoA cites, when talking about ordinary members in<br>
> > section IV:<br>> > <br>> > (3) The General Assembly is authorized to grant Member status in<br>> > Pirate Parties International to any Pirate party, which subscribes to<br>> > the association’s principles and accepts its statutes and internal<br>
> > regulations.<br>> > <br>> > But obviously... it would have been invoked in the CoA ruling about<br>> > the acceptance of the applicants that submitted their application<br>> > after the deadline if it was meant not to be relativized by Section<br>
> > III paragraph (3).<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > NOW... I have searched through the PPI website, and I could not find<br>> > any evidence of an application form for full membership of the PPI<br>
> > coming from PP-CAT.<br>> > <br>> > NOR... have I found in the minutes of the Assembly session any<br>> > evidence of PP-CAT applying for full membership in due course, be it<br>> > voted upon or not.<br>
> > <br>> > <br>> > As a result, I conclude thus that PP-CAT has NOT applied in due form<br>> > for full membership at the 2012 PPI GA Assembly, and as such they were<br>> > at that ocasion ===NOT APPLICANTS=== as is needed to invoke on their<br>
> > behalf Section III paragraph (4) of the current PPI Statutes.<br>> > <br>> > The Assembly has NO discretional powers to grant membership to any<br>> > Pirate Party she wishes without these Parties being subject to the<br>
> > requisites of the formal and statutory admission procedure.<br>> > <br>> > Therefor, the verdict published as CoA Court Ruling 2012-3 is VOID!<br>> > <br>> > Therefor, the motion submitted by PP-AU was illegal and should never<br>
> > have been discussed, making any of its results VOID!<br>> > <br>> > Therefor, the Pirate Party of Catalonia can under the present<br>> > circumstances not be said to have acquired full membership status<br>
> > through the acts performed at the 2012 PPI GA.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Now, not to exacerbate the situation with PP-CAT within Spain, I would<br>> > love it if this argumentation was presented to the PPI Board and the<br>
> > PPI Court of Arbitration by somebody else than PP Spain.<br>> > <br>> > Maybe another Pirate Party could do so, or it is enough to submit the<br>> > <br>> > facts anonymously for the Board of PPI or/and the Court of Arbitration<br>
> > <br>> > to start the proper procedure on their own once under knowledge of<br>> > <br>> > the facts, or if no alternative is available PP Spain will have to sign<br>> > the necessary paperwork itself.<br>
> > <br>> > But what has to be done, shall be done.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Pirately yours,<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Antonio García<br>> > Pirate Party Spain<br>> > <br>
> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > If at all possible, please reformulate the context of this complaint<br>> > letter in your own words, as my writing style and argumentation<br>> > skills are not unknown among quite a few Pirates.<br>
> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Once more, thank you for having the guts to be independent and<br>> > <br>> > integer.<br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Please aknowledge receipt of the present letter as soon as possible.<br>
> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > <br>> > Antonio García<br>> > Pirate Party Spain<br><br>as you may have guessed, my patience with the irresponsible behaviour is over, as it will otherwise be totally impossible to perform politically as desired and worthy of our movement in the various upcoming elections. some instruments and strategies that are ready to be used and could be killer applications towards achieving astonishing results simply can not b handed over for their use by unconscient, playing, kiddies.<br>
<br>antonio garcía<br>not representing here the pirate party of spain<br></div></div></blockquote></div></div><div><br></div>