Events/EGA:2013-09/Notes: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
m (move pad from piratepad to pad.pirateparty.be) |
||
(8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Click on this link to access to the pads used to produce the following page: '''[https://pad.pirateparty.be/p/EGA2013liege '''https://pad.pirateparty.be/p/EGA2013liege'''] | |||
== Voting == | == Voting == | ||
Note takers: | |||
* sandb | |||
* Vincent L. | |||
* fred m. | |||
Introduced a third option for voting: next to | Introduced a third option for voting: next to | ||
Line 6: | Line 13: | ||
we introduce | we introduce | ||
* "postponed" (white) | * "postponed" (white) | ||
White option voted '''yes''' unanimously | |||
questions: | |||
* Minimum of 2 votes difference, else postponed automatically | * Minimum of 2 votes difference, else postponed automatically | ||
* Not 50% for green, then it is not yes? | * Not 50% for green, then it is not yes? | ||
Discussion on voting; do we go for classic voting and forgo the adaption? | Discussion on voting; do we go for classic voting and forgo the adaption? | ||
* 21 yes | * 21 yes | ||
* 3 no | * 3 no | ||
* Accepted | * Accepted, classic voting | ||
* So we will not be using the white paper option | |||
Counting: | |||
* Everybody counts votes if it's a close call. | |||
General remark: | |||
* Rejected does not mean it definitely Rejected, | |||
Proposals: [[File:PP_EGA_september_2013.pdf]]. | |||
== Motion 1: The Pirateparty Programme == | == Motion 1: The Pirateparty Programme == | ||
Line 47: | Line 58: | ||
{{GaProp|9|Rejected|+=15|-=24}} | {{GaProp|9|Rejected|+=15|-=24}} | ||
{{GaProp|10|Accepted}} | {{GaProp|10|Accepted}} | ||
{{GaProp|11|+=21|-=17|remarks= | {{GaProp|11|Accepted|+=21|-=17|remarks= | ||
** this definition can be applied to every company | ** this definition can be applied to every company | ||
** required recount | ** required recount | ||
Line 64: | Line 75: | ||
{{GaProp|17|Accepted|+=24|-=11|remarks= | {{GaProp|17|Accepted|+=24|-=11|remarks= | ||
** Fuzzy language}} | ** Fuzzy language}} | ||
=== [1.3] Domestic politics and democracy === | |||
{{GaProp|18|Rejected|remarks= | {{GaProp|18|Rejected|remarks= | ||
** what is "democratie radicale"? | ** what is "democratie radicale"? | ||
** is it "imposed democracy" ;) | ** is it "imposed democracy" ;) | ||
** We need another word than "radical" (2.1)}} | ** We need another word than "radical" (2.1)}} | ||
{{GaProp|19|Rejected|+=14|-=24}} | {{GaProp|19|Rejected|+=14|-=24}} | ||
{{GaProp|20|Rejected|remarks= | {{GaProp|20|Rejected|remarks= | ||
Line 160: | Line 171: | ||
** why only bankers}} | ** why only bankers}} | ||
We | We interupted voting because we are quickly running out-of-time; | ||
* a proposal was made to deal with this problem | * a proposal was made to deal with this problem | ||
** whatever is not voted here today will be submitted on getopinionated | ** whatever is not voted here today will be submitted on getopinionated |
Latest revision as of 19:09, 6 March 2017
Click on this link to access to the pads used to produce the following page: https://pad.pirateparty.be/p/EGA2013liege
Voting
Note takers:
- sandb
- Vincent L.
- fred m.
Introduced a third option for voting: next to
- "yes" (green) or
- "no" (red)
we introduce
- "postponed" (white)
White option voted yes unanimously
questions:
- Minimum of 2 votes difference, else postponed automatically
- Not 50% for green, then it is not yes?
Discussion on voting; do we go for classic voting and forgo the adaption?
- 21 yes
- 3 no
- Accepted, classic voting
- So we will not be using the white paper option
Counting:
- Everybody counts votes if it's a close call.
General remark:
- Rejected does not mean it definitely Rejected,
Motion 1: The Pirateparty Programme
[1.1] Proposal for an "Introduction for the party programme"
1:
- Status: Rejected
2.1:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- French version is leading version
- translation problem: radicale democratie should be directe democratie
2.2:
- Status: Accepted
2.3:
- Status: Accepted
2.4:
- Status: Accepted
3:
- Status: Rejected/Postponed
4:
- Status: Rejected
5:
- Status: Rejected
- Votes for: 14
- Votes against: 19
[1.2] Freedoms and civilian rights
6:
- Status: Accepted
7:
- Status: Accepted
- Votes for: 23
- Votes against: 13
8:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- better written version of 9
9:
- Status: Rejected
- Votes for: 15
- Votes against: 24
10:
- Status: Accepted
11:
- Status: Accepted
- Votes for: 21
- Votes against: 17
- Notes:
- this definition can be applied to every company
- required recount
- how could we make anyone liable to use public facilities?
12:
- Status: Accepted
13:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- Assange is not a wistleblower
- better if names were removed
- Voted as is, but could use an amendment
14:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- Better definition required for "net neutrality".
15:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- It's more or less already in there: but remarks about only postal system and human rights with similar initiative.
16:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- Factual issue in the proposal since the press can be censored, what about private data protection
17:
- Status: Accepted
- Votes for: 24
- Votes against: 11
- Notes:
- Fuzzy language
[1.3] Domestic politics and democracy
18:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- what is "democratie radicale"?
- is it "imposed democracy" ;)
- We need another word than "radical" (2.1)
19:
- Status: Rejected
- Votes for: 14
- Votes against: 24
20:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- fuzzy "what's being for the referendum?"
- how do we define referendum?
21:
- Status: Postponed
- Votes for: 18
- Votes against: 16
22:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- what does that mean?
- we already have justice system
23:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- This is about someone who's been elected, not for candidates;
24:
- Status: Accepted
- Votes for: 20
- Notes:
- The proposal is too vague, too general
25:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- What do we mean by recognize? (aknowledge existence or legitimity ?)
26:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- Same remark as 25.
[1.4] Economics
27:
- Status: Accepted
28:
- Status: Accepted
29:
- Status: Accepted
- Votes for: 25
- Notes:
- Vague and fuzzy?
- Ambiguous?
- What does local economy mean?
- Does it mean protectionism?
- note: does not explain, also does not say protectionism
30:
- Status: Rejected/Postponed
- Notes:
- What does "resource" means; answer from author: means "resource based economy" needs clarification
31:
- Status: Accepted
- Votes for: 20
- Votes against: 13
- Notes:
- what's "alternative economy"?
- see examples
32:
- Status: Rejected
- Votes for: 14
- Votes against: 18
33:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- not clear on what it really means
34:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- it's a statement, not a program point or opinion
35:
- Status: Accepted
36:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- need to change EU laws for that
- the first part is already in 27
37:
- Status: Accepted
38:
- Status: Accepted
39:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- universal basic income (everyone)
- what's the definition of basic income?
- also remarked: "factual error, labour is not an economic product"
40:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- minimun wage (working people only)
41:
- Status: Accepted
42:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- this is demagogy, ideology, unclear, fuzzy
43:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- implies corporate citizenship? (==a company is having same right as a citizen)
44:
- Status: Rejected
45:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- awfully stated
46:
- Status: Postponed
- Votes for: 17
- Votes against: 15
- Notes:
- European law problem;
- Very hard to realize
47:
- Status: Accepted
48:
- Status: Rejected
- Votes for: 10
- Votes against: 18
- Notes:
- Who is "them"?
- Pirates or citizens?
49:
- Status: Accepted
50:
- Status: Accepted
51:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- Should state "a public audit" or something like that
52:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- cannot be done in only one country,
- should explicitely read a wage/profit "ratio".
- is missing clear definition and is quite populist position;
- how would we explain this to a journalist
53:
- Status: Rejected
54:
- Status: Rejected
- Votes for: 14
- Votes against: 17
- Notes:
- lower cap but also upper cap limitation, should maybe say minimally
[1.5] Banks
55:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- Too vague,
- should say public financing (with money from the state),
- also who would finance a bank that has gone bust anyway?
- too anecdoctical, lack of big picture.
56:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- the national part could be left out
57:
- Status: Rejected
We interupted voting because we are quickly running out-of-time;
- a proposal was made to deal with this problem
- whatever is not voted here today will be submitted on getopinionated
- and will be voted on getopinionated
- and will be valid as if elected on the EGA
- with voting closing before the first november
- only members will be able to vote: each Pirate will receive his/her membership via email, and then registrations will be closed (for security).
- only proposals from the program will be voted
- the proposal was accepted,
- a decision was made to continue up until proposal 62 and to end before point "1.6 Labour social affairs".
58:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- unclear: what are policticians, while they are active or allways; only banks? ... ?
59:
- Status: Accepted unanymously
60:
- Status: Rejected
61:
- Status: Rejected
- Notes:
- This would mean we have to exit the euro
62:
- Status: Accepted
- Notes:
- What is a dubious investment? Who defines it?)
EOEGA- End of General Assembly
- BIG THX TO ORGANISERS!!
- End at 17:50