<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
Nice, democratic stance, my dear.<br><br>Your decisions are final, point, and the rest can troll freely if it so wishes... whether their arguments are right or not does not matter.<br><br><br>And you have the right to use blackmail when you do not get things your way, like at the PPI GA in Prague... because you are unique and special ;) .<br><br>Each day I understand less what being a Pirate is all about... seeing all what is allowed to happen without anybody doing anything else than looking the other way and isolating any critical thinking anyone dares to show.<br><br>Does right or wrong matter at all once a "democratic" majority decides anything as foolish as to rule by decree that 2+2=5?<br><br>This last one is a question to all ... but Kenneth, of course, because he can not be bothered with such trivialities without calling anyone a troll.<br><br>At least he has stated publicly that he does not mind if we "hijack" this dead thread for the purpose of having an interesting discussion ;) .<br><br><br>Antonio.<br>PP-ES<br><br><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div><hr id="stopSpelling">Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 18:39:46 +0200<br>From: kenneth@pirata.cat<br>To: pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net<br>Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] Board meeting protocols of Pirate Parties<br><br>We already made our decision clear, so this thread is dead.<div><br></div><div>Feel free to troll it.<br><br><br><font size="2">Salut!</font> </div><br>Antonio Garcia <ningunotro@hotmail.com> escribió:<br><div dir="ltr"> But they knew where they were participating in, and the stance of the party towards public disclosure of their participation.<br><br>Pirates de Catalunya has recently rendered public by publishing on youtube the raw footage of the 1-2 sept Barcelona Conference. Do they have a signed statement allowing for public exposition from any and everyone of the persons featuring in those recordings? Should those recordings have been published if you had followed the line you are trying to enforce now?<br><br>They show personal interest for events pertaining to the category of ideology, as in... people interested in hearing about Pirate politics, and everybody can recognize whoever he happens to recall the looks of.<br><br>I believe you still mix two different issues here... the one where the LOPD drops in, where you make public at any given occasion information stored in your databases that has been confided to you at another occasion to cover other necessities or for some precisely stated purposes... without the person giving you this data having expressly allowed different uses for his data, nor being around to add the presently wanted use of these for the current purpose; and an altogether different one where a person, whether or not some data concerning him are present in your databases, participates in an event and by doing this implicitly or explicitly grants permission to use the footage, recording, minutes or whatever for any purpose normally associated with the logic application of results resulting from such a participation. Of course, limited to what that person has allowed to be known of him from his wilful and voluntary participation, without need for further written permissions, and in no way for you to add into the processing other information coming from your databases that he has not given you permission to link publicly to whatever he chooses to disclose freely himself performing at the occasion.<br><br>Be aware of the fact that... what you need to be safe from the LOPD is permission for the data to be used for a stated single purpose. Nothing forbids you to contact said persons and actually ask permission to do something additional with the data of them that you have on record... so the LOPD is not that harsh as you portray it... only that it may be financially or otherwise (maybe active manpower with needed clearances) unattainable for some to comply with the required exigences.<br><br>Sometimes simplifying a situation too much can conceal possible solutions, be they practicable or not according to our own possibilities, and make us choose other exits that are not easier either. <br><br>Antonio.<br>PP-ES<br><br><br><div><div id="ecxSkyDrivePlaceholder"></div>> From: muriel@pirata.cat<br>> Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 17:24:17 +0200<br>> To: pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net<br>> Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] Board meeting protocols of Pirate Parties<br>> <br>> Hi Antonio,<br>> <br>> That's our idea. We don't want to anonymize party members with a<br>> function (such as the treasurer or the secretary) because we think<br>> that this is public information anyway, just all the other members<br>> that participate in the general assemblies and don't have any<br>> function, and didn't give their explicit consent either.<br>> <br>> We all agree that we also want to publish the GA minutes, and not only<br>> the board ones, so we'll do it as soon as we have some time. :)<br>> <br>> Best regards,<br>> <br>> Muriel<br></div> </div> <br>____________________________________________________
Pirate Parties International - General Talk
pp.international.general@lists.pirateweb.net
http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general</div> </div></body>
</html>