Talk:Pirate Democracy: Difference between revisions
NingúnOtro (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Paul Nollen (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
--[[User:NingúnOtro|NingúnOtro]] I strongly oppose the fact that a direct entry in the Pirate Party Wiki without any sign of approval of its content by the wider Assembly can be made representative of the thoughts of the Pirate Party as a whole on any subject. | --[[User:NingúnOtro|NingúnOtro]] I strongly oppose the fact that a direct entry in the Pirate Party Wiki without any sign of approval of its content by the wider Assembly can be made representative of the thoughts of the Pirate Party as a whole on any subject. | ||
"Pirate Democracy" is too important a subject to have Paul | "Pirate Democracy" is too important a subject to have Paul Nollen take on it be what any circumstancial visitors to our Wiki get to believe that what he writes is what the whole Party takes for granted. | ||
If there is one thing more wrong than any other about it... it is the fact that he may think that he is entitled to try to get away with it simply by having the guts to write it down and publish it in the Wiki. | If there is one thing more wrong than any other about it... it is the fact that he may think that he is entitled to try to get away with it simply by having the guts to write it down and publish it in the Wiki. | ||
One of the biggest dangers of direct democracy... everyone thinks his take on things is authoritative enough, and he lacks the reflex to ask others for their opinion on the matter. Instead of a community, we become an opportunistic gathering of mere individuals each trying to retrieve more than what we input, all chaotically improvised and geared towards the survival of the fittest... | One of the biggest dangers of direct democracy... everyone thinks his take on things is authoritative enough, and he lacks the reflex to ask others for their opinion on the matter. Instead of a community, we become an opportunistic gathering of mere individuals each trying to retrieve more than what we input, all chaotically improvised and geared towards the survival of the fittest... | ||
---- | |||
It is impossible to start any discussion or come to any conclusion without giving some content. I don't try to impose anything. I just wanted to offer the possibility to study and discuss the subject of "democracy". For a lot of people "direct democracy" like it exists in Switzerland and half of the US states is simply unknown. The very basic discussions on the mailing lists prove this. | |||
Our squad just had his first meeting in order to try to organise open workshops about the democracy item. I hope that we can provide some information about these workshops in the next week or so. | |||
Maybe this can reassure you that we don't intend to impose anything. At due time we may reach a conclusion in the Squad and even then that conclusion has to be approved by the general assemblee. Apart from direct democracy there are other forms of democracy worth talking about. I am a member (amongst other organisations) of participedia who offers very interesting examples http://participedia.net/ | |||
--[[User:Paul Nollen|Paul Nollen]] 20:40, 13 November 2012 (CET) | |||
Revision as of 20:40, 13 November 2012
--NingúnOtro I strongly oppose the fact that a direct entry in the Pirate Party Wiki without any sign of approval of its content by the wider Assembly can be made representative of the thoughts of the Pirate Party as a whole on any subject.
"Pirate Democracy" is too important a subject to have Paul Nollen take on it be what any circumstancial visitors to our Wiki get to believe that what he writes is what the whole Party takes for granted.
If there is one thing more wrong than any other about it... it is the fact that he may think that he is entitled to try to get away with it simply by having the guts to write it down and publish it in the Wiki.
One of the biggest dangers of direct democracy... everyone thinks his take on things is authoritative enough, and he lacks the reflex to ask others for their opinion on the matter. Instead of a community, we become an opportunistic gathering of mere individuals each trying to retrieve more than what we input, all chaotically improvised and geared towards the survival of the fittest...
It is impossible to start any discussion or come to any conclusion without giving some content. I don't try to impose anything. I just wanted to offer the possibility to study and discuss the subject of "democracy". For a lot of people "direct democracy" like it exists in Switzerland and half of the US states is simply unknown. The very basic discussions on the mailing lists prove this. Our squad just had his first meeting in order to try to organise open workshops about the democracy item. I hope that we can provide some information about these workshops in the next week or so. Maybe this can reassure you that we don't intend to impose anything. At due time we may reach a conclusion in the Squad and even then that conclusion has to be approved by the general assemblee. Apart from direct democracy there are other forms of democracy worth talking about. I am a member (amongst other organisations) of participedia who offers very interesting examples http://participedia.net/ --Paul Nollen 20:40, 13 November 2012 (CET)