|The next PPI Conference is in Paris, April 12th & 13th 2014|
PPI Conference 2013/GA meeting/Minutes
Note: All times are in Kazan (Russia) local time.
Saturday, April 20, 2013 morning block
09:35 - Opening
Sven Clement (PP-LU) and Denis Simonet (PP-CH) get accepted as meeting chairs of the GA
Sven asks who is willing to do the minutes. Pat Mächler (PP-CH) is willing to do the minutes.
Sven Clement appoints Pat Mächler as the minute keeper.
09:45 - Speech by Pavel Rassudov (Chairman PP-RU, host party)
- Pavel Rassudov welcomes everyone to the conference. He talks about the issues of the Russians with the Ministry of Justice, the common culture of Europe and Russia, the global movement in general. The speech is in Russian and translated.
09:50 - Speech by Gregory Engels (current co-chairman PPI)
- Gregory Engels provides a short review of the movement in the last year: 43 elections, 28 seats in regional parliaments, 1 senator (PP-CZ), first elected mayor (PP-CH), indication that pirates are accepted as political player. The political world now considers the pirate movement as a political force, i.e. as it helped to stop ACTA. PPI was also at certain WIPO events. Gregory reasons about the decision for Russia as host (global movement thus farthest available place from the previous one, recent 2nd denial of PP-RU for registration by the Ministry of Justice, NGOs now got a lot of restrictions concerning international work within Russia). Gregory reasons about the rainbow flag of the Queeraten he brought along and the law restrictions within Russia which are against human rights. Gregory reasons about some of the replacement contracts of ACTA: IPRED (reversal of proof of guilt if you will get disconnected for alleged infringements), TTP, CETA. He also mentions reform on the prohibition of drugs and patent seed frameworks as examples where an international organization is needed.
10:00 - Vote on the Rules of Procedure (RoP)
- The meeting chair Sven asks whether everyone is okay with the proposed RoP.
- Jens Stomber (PP-DE) brings forward the question concerning adding new motions during the GA. The meeting chairs Sven explains the reasoning behind that.
- The meeting chair Sven reminds about the procedure concerning handing in votes for remote delegates, which were instructed previously.
- There is a slight delay as the GA is waiting for the votes of the remote delegates, as well as setting up a direct connection for the presentation machine to the meeting chairs table.
Quorum is reached for remote participant.
|Vote on Rules of Procedure|
|Result||7 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => The Rules of Procedures are accepted|
10:34 - Presentation of applicants as ordinary member
Latvia: There is no person to present.
Slovaquia: There is no person to present. There are 15 active member, they registered last year.
Ukrainian Pirate Community: There is no person to present.
Bosnia-Herzegowina: Sent in a video which is due to be presented.
- PP-CZ: raises the issue that they are denied access to the pad.
The video of Bosnia-Herzegowina is shown.
Estonia: Sent in a video which is shown.
Belarus: There were two different applications, one for ordinary member, one for observer member. The organizations now decided to merge their efforts into just one application as an ordinary member. Mikhail Volchek provides a presentation at the place as speaker of the Belarusian pirates using a slideshow; it's about their organization and their expectiations on PPI.
Tunisia: Maxime Rouquet (PP-FR) presents the current situation in Tunisia, where another group denies to work with the applicant. However the applicant says he offered to work together and would be actually willing to share PPI membership.
Israel: There is no person to present.
Hungary: There is no person to present. Sven mentions that they provided statutes in Hungarian.
Iceland: There is no person to present. Sven recites the founding date, the member count and some other data as written in the wiki.
Turkey: Yasin Aydin (PP-TR) who represents the Turkish board presents the group. He mentions some key data about the party, such as supporters. He tells about the Internet censorship by the Turkish government, that the PP-TR provides information to people on how to defend ones anonymity and that plan to setup service for unfiltered net access.
Poland: Sent in a presentation which is shown. The party is currently intensifying activities again and gaining more momentum.
Japan: Tom Kito (PP-JP) tells about the difficult situation in Japan, where there is a lot controlled by the mainstream media. There is one dominating party and e.g. the green party did still not register, although they are rather old. Some people get arrested without any clear reason. The situation got especially worse after 9/11. They try to establish the party, but it's difficult as everyone who participated lost their job due to the activities. They have about 100 members. The core of the PP-JP is thus demanding basic democracy.
Korea (South): Sven provides the data about the party as written in the wiki. They are also struggling a bit with the name. They provided some slogans which states their position.
11:28 - Presentation of applicants as observer member
Berlin: A person was expected. Postponed.
Young Pirates (Ung Pirat, SE): A person was expected. Postponed.
Best Party Iceland: Sven provides the keydata as written in the wiki: Humanity, culture, nature and peace are the cores. They are the ruling party in Reykjavik
Tyrol: Sent in a video which is shown.
- It becomes clear that Berlin won't be presented directly by a person.
Sweden: Anna Troberg turns in via a video connection. She speaks about the expectations and the intent of PP-SE to follow the work of PPI.
Young Pirates (Ung Pirat, SE): It becomes clear that Ung Pirat won't be presented directly by a person. Sven presents the keydata about Ung Pirat.
Berlin: Sven presents the keydata about the party as written in the wiki.
La Rioja: Sven presents the keydata about the party as written in the wiki.
11:42 - Afternoon program
- Gregory presents the afternoon program: There will be a meal break after the program until 13:00 (Kazan local time). There will be presentations in an unconference/open space/barcamp style by remote and IRL delegates. The present are asked to propose their barcamp suggestions.
- Lora Iakovleva (PP-RU) will present 3 to 4 topics, e.g. about broadening the platform.
- Alexis Roussel (PP-CH) will present the strategy of the Pirate Party Switzerland.
- Jens Stomber (PP-DE) would like to record video clips, as well as the crypto party movement.
- Sven Clement (PP-LU) will talk about the statute changes.
- Gregory Engels will talk about changes in democracy worldwide.
- Rick Falkvinge will provide a talk.
The proposals are pinned on a whiteboard and are open for additions for remote and IRL delegates.
The morning block is closed at 11:53
- Some additional info concerning the lunch is provided by the host
Saturday, April 20, 2013 afternoon block
13:00 - Statute change proposal discussions (room B)
- Sven Clement explains the concept: This is a discussion on the handed in statute proposals. There will be no formal decisions, but the intent is that as most members can participate as possible. The votes on the proposals will be carried out tomorrow, Sunday.
The planned start of 13:00 gets stalled until 14:05 as there were problems with the video stream.
Note by the editor: according to the statutes statute changes (SAPs) require a two thirds majority, motions a simple majority. The chair ignored votes that were casted as abstention to evaluate the outcome.
Multiple members per territory
This paragraph concerns the statute proposals #SAP-1a, #SAP-1b, #SAP-2a, #SAP-2b, #SAP-19, #SAP-25, #SAP-29 and #SAP-32
- Sven Clement puts forward the discussion what is the opinion of the people present
- PP-CH is generally against multiple members per country, but could agree to certain exceptions if there are severe political problems in that region.
- PP-BR says the problem with Catalonia/Spain might arise anywhere and that they are formally opposed.
- PP-LU is formally opposed to have multiple ordinary members per country, as they think the best way is cooperation and the easiest way to achieve this is to "enforce" federations or confederations in that way.
- PP-FR does neither want to have multiple ordinary members per souvereign state. France proposes to fix the problem until to the next year in order to let those who are affected
- PP-AU prefers most #SAP-19 including amendment b (the Czech proposal, which includes the "souvereign state" rule by France, but goes further).
- Denis suggest to vote independently on the proposals to see whether a statute amendment could be accepted and then to see whether there are conflicts.
There is an argument with remote and IRL delegates that the remote participation is not as it should be for a party who is promoting technology. It eventually the present try to resolve it by using phone calls with loudspeaker.
- PP-CAT says that they are pushing for a confederation, as long as the PP-ES does not represent the whole of the pirates in Spain, because they are not federated. No party in Spain can talk in the name of the others, not even Partido Pirata. Catalonia is willing to solve the situation in a proper way and they are willing to work together with all parties including Spain PP.
- PP-BA asks if they can already vote.
- Sven explains that there is no formal vote today and Bosnia-Herzegowina can vote tomorrow by proxy.
- Maxime PP-FR: The point what Catalonia brings forward is probably that the regulation of federations should also apply to confederations.
Sven proposes now to try an informal vote on all proposals (#SAP-1a, #SAP-1b, #SAP-2a, #SAP-2b, #SAP-19, #SAP-25, #SAP-29, #SAP-32).
The remote delegates have 14:44 till 14:47 to cast votes by mail, then the IRL delegates will raise the cards (this delay rule is in order to avoid tactical voting)
|Informal vote on #SAP-1a|
|Result||6 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-1a is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on #SAP-1b|
|Result||6 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-1b is informally rejected|
- Fabricio (PP-DE) notifies that Portugal sent a procedural motion.
- There is an argument by Sven that there is no possibility to do this. The motion has to be send in by e-mail to the chair.
|Informal vote on #SAP-2a|
|Result||3 YES, 3 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-2a is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on #SAP-2b|
|Result||2 YES, 5 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-2b is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on #SAP-19|
|Result||4 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-19 is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on #SAP-25|
|Result||1 YES, 3 NO, 3 ABS => #SAP-25 is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on #SAP-29|
|Result||2 YES, 3 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-29 is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on #SAP-32|
|Result||3 YES, 2 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-32 is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-19a|
|Result||3 YES, 1 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-19a is informally accepted|
|Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-19b|
|Result||5 YES, 0 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-19b is informally accepted|
- Maxime: Everyone seems to be in favour of replacing the word in the statutes with "sovereign state". There is a stance from certain members that "confederation" should be added, if "federation" is there. It would be possible to draw a consolidated version based on this. I would be willing to draft this one up.
- Sven asks if this would be acceptable.
- There is no opposition.
Regarding Court of Arbitration
This paragraph concerns the statute proposals #SAP-11, #SAP-17, #SAP-26 and #SAP-31
- Sven: There are certain motion that would change the underlying law to Swiss law for the CoA which is e.g. used in international sports and available in many languages ( #SAP-17, #SAP-31 ), one concerning changing the court into a council ( #SAP-26 ), one concerning adding investigators ( #SAP-11 ).
- Stefan: PP-CH objects #SAP-11 as we don't want to have investigators that interfere with issues of the parties and second because it's not part of the power of a court.
- Marc: How do you wanna make sure that the underlying facts are true then?
- Stefan: We think the parties in the case should bring forward the arguments to the court. Normally you bring all the evidence with your arguments to the court.
- Maxime: The proposal amendment is exactly in order to alleviate the problem where parties file issues, but do not provide sufficient data to judge on the data. Thus it's really better to have investigators in order to help filing the case, as at the moment it doesn't really work well.
- Sven: I remember the case in Prague, where we discussed whether there was corruption among the board concerning the place. In that case the complainant that there exist written documents that say that this GA should not take place in Europe. In that case we just had two sides, where the question was which side to trust.
A procedural joint motion was handed in by remote delegates. The meeting chaired asked for 10 minutes to evaluate it.
10 minutes break till 16:00
The meeting chair answered to the joint by mail and summarizes the reply. The response in full reads
Dear motioneers, Thank you for your proposals. The Chair decided as follows: Joint procedural Motions: >1) Repeating of the original vote to assess quorum This is not a valid procedural motion, thus rejected by RoP. >2) Vote to revoke a decision to declare that the GA has started. This decision has been taken this morning. The RoP (7.3.3. m) say that such a motion can only be raised immediately after the decision is announced, thus also rejected by RoP. >3) Motion to reassess the quorum. As we currently are in an informal part of the conference the assembly is de facto in recess. We are going to reassess the quorum anyway tomorrow morning when we resume the conference. Nonetheless, this changes nothing on the de jure situation that we are in an informal part, because the only result could be that we are in recess. >4) Postpone indefinitely motions (MOP-1, MOP-2) This will be tabled immediately. >5) Table the discussion on agenda as the next point on the agenda This will be tabled for tomorrow morning 10 o'clock Kazan time (UTC+4) as then the assembly will resume. Kind regards, Sven Clement Denis Simonet
- Marc proposes to change the word for people assisting the court (now: "investigators") into something else such as "expert".
- A discussion inbetween Marc and Maxime arises.
- Sven invites the remote delegate to come up with proposals as well.
- Sven asks whether #SAP-31 would be also acceptable for PP-CH instead of #SAP-17.
- Stefan: The main difference is that the court is either formed by a person of each member, whereas in #SAP-31 they get elected by the GA. The reason is that the members are more capable to tell who could be a good judge from among their pirates.
- Sven: There is proposal #SAP-31a by PP-CZ. Would that change anything concerning for PP-CH?
- Stefan: We would accept #SAP-31 with #SAP-31a as a replacement for our #SAP-17 and withdraw it in that case.
The chair opens a vote at 16:11 till 16:16 on #SAP-31a
|Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-31a|
|Result||6 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-31a is informally accepted|
- Stefan: We thus would withdraw #SAP-17 as #SAP-31 gets likely accepted
The chair opens a vote on #SAP-11, #SAP-26, #SAP-31, at 16:18 till 16:23
|Informal vote on #SAP-11|
|Result||5 YES, 1 NO, 3 ABS => #SAP-11 is informally accepted|
|Informal vote on #SAP-26|
|Result||4 YES, 3 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-26 is informally accepted|
|Informal vote on #SAP-31|
|Result||5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-31 is informally accepted|
- Maxime proposes a vote inbetween #SAP-26 and #SAP-31
The majority agrees that there shall be a straw poll inbetween #SAP-26 and #SAP-31 as to which one is preferred
|Informal vote on #SAP-26 vs #SAP-31|
|editor: detailed voting data not available, as it was too fast to note down|
|Result||5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-31 is preferred|
Technical small changes
This paragraph concerns the statute proposals #SAP-12, #SAP-13, #SAP-14, #SAP-18 and #SAP-22.
The chair summarizes the proposals:
- #SAP-12 is about changing "juristic person" into "legal person"
- #SAP-13 is about changing "three quarters" into "threequarters"
- #SAP-14 is about changing "bear to" into "abide by"
- #SAP-18 is combining #SAP-12, #SAP-13, #SAP-14 plus clarifying that the ordinary members are the ones that could decide on the statute amendments
- #SAP-22 is about adding regulations to clarify when statute amendments shall come into effect
- #SAP-18a is combining #SAP-18 and #SAP-22 plus about explicitely clarifying that #SAP-18 upon approval shall come into effect immediately
The chair proposes to vote on #SAP-18 and #SAP-18a, as when approved clearly the present can skip the discussion on #SAP-12, #SAP-13, #SAP-14 and #SAP-22.
|Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-18a|
|Result||7 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-18a is informally accepted|
|Informal vote on #SAP-18|
|Result||8 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-18 is informally accepted|
The chair notes that thus the votes on #SAP-12, #SAP-13, #SAP-14, #SAP-22 are not necessary as their intent appears to have a clear majority found.
Voting majorities and other mechanisms
This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-20, #SAP-20a, #SAP-30 and #SAP-30a.
The chair summarizes the proposals:
- #SAP-20 would changes how the majority is calculated and removes the right for proxies / remote participation
- #SAP-20a would ammend that it only comes only after the GA (i.e. that remote participation is still possible for this GA)
- #SAP-30 has been withdrawn
- #SAP-30a would clarify that statute proposals must be announced for extraordinary meetings. As #SAP-30 was withdrawn the chair handles #SAP-30a as a statute proposal on it's own (instead of a procedural motion)
|Informal vote on #SAP-20|
|Result||3 YES, 3 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-20 is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-20a|
|Result||4 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-20a would be informally accepted|
- It is suggested to add #SAP-20a directly to #SAP-20. However it becomes clear that the present would still informally reject such a motion.
|Informal vote on #SAP-30a|
|Result||4 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-30a is informally rejected|
This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-21 and #SAP-27.
- Sven (chair): #SAP-27 is about changing to a board of representatives
- Maxime: We like the idea of #SAP-27, but we're afraid that we loose activity as it will be hard to find members in each ordinary member.
- Sven says that PP-LU shares this view; additionally that these people would be also responsible for a lot of other stuff and that there will be a lot of overhead if there are more than 7 people.
- Sven (chair):#SAP-21 changes the composition of the board and simplify it, eleminating alternative members and changing wordings.
|Informal vote on #SAP-21|
|Result||2 YES, 6 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-21 is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on #SAP-27|
|Result||3 YES, 5 NO, 0 ABS => #SAP-27 is informally rejected|
Adoption of e-Democracy, conflicting motions, public votes
This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-24, #SAP-24a, #SAP-24b and #SAP-28.
- Sven (chair):#SAP-24 creates a permanent online e-democracy system instead of a postal referendum. Issued and initiatives can be raised to the board. Anyone outside still has to submit to the GA.
- PP-LU seems to be strongly against it, as computers don't work out
- PP-BR mentions that this is the future
The chair summarizes further:
- SAP-24a removes the point of competing motions
- SAP-24b add that there can be a permanent GA
- Sven (chair):#SAP-28 is about making votes public
- PP-LU and PP-FR express their support as there is a responsibility to pirates as delegates
|Informal vote on #SAP-24|
|Result||4 YES, 3 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-24 is informally rejected|
|Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-24a|
|Result||5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-24a would be informally accepted|
|Informal vote on procedural motion #SAP-24b|
|Result||4 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-24b would be informally accepted|
- #SAP-24 is recounted due to request
|Recount informal vote on #SAP-24|
|Result||4 YES, 2 NO, 2 ABS => #SAP-24 is informally accepted|
|Informal vote on #SAP-28|
|Result||6 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-28 is informally accepted|
Human Rights, balance privacy vs transparency, annual goals
This paragraph concerns the proposals #SAP-8, #SAP-9 and #SAP-23.
On request by the current minute keeper (Pat Mächler), Marc Tholl is appointed as the intermediate minute keeper by the meeting chair Sven Clement
- The chair shortly summarizes the proposals and the votes are casted.
|Informal vote on #SAP-8|
|Result||5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-8 is informally accepted|
|Informal vote on #SAP-9|
|Result||4 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-9 is informally accepted|
|Informal vote on #SAP-23|
|Result||5 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-23 is informally accepted|
Sunday, April 21, 2013 morning block
10:00 - Opening
Due to technical problems and a missing number of remote delegates the start was postponed to 11:00.
The meeting is chaired again by Sven Clement and Denis Simonet, the minutes are kept again by Pat Mächler.
Meeting opened by Sven Clement at 11:00
10 ordinary members are present, thus the necessary quorum is reached.
The chair states that
- present with IRL delegates are CH, DE, FR, LU, RU.
- present with remote delegates are AU, CAT, ES, PT, UK.
- CA is not attending but provided a message which they want to be read to the PPI assembly:
- Sven states that he is personally not happy about the statement, but that now everyone has the opportunity to enter into the discussion with the Canadians as to why or where.
- The chair asks whether anyone wants to discuss the agenda of today, as there was a motion from yesterday to discuss the agenda for today (Sunday). The proposed agenda is still valid until amendments will be made.
The remote delegates are granted 3 minutes to respond.
- The local German delegate states that there is a procedural motion in a pad on how to handle remote delegates, which is due to be discussed.
- The chair states that he needs to know which pad is meant.
- The local German delegate will clarify on that.
- On question it is noted that the agenda is published in the wiki.
- The chair notes that there was another procedural motion left ofter from yesterday to adjourn MOP-1 and MOP-2 indefinitely, which is interpreted by the meeting chair as them at the back of the agenda. There is no opposition, thus the motion passed.
PP-KZ is joining the meeting as remote delegate. 11 ordinary members are present.
- AU handed in a procedural motion, that the statute amendments shall be discussed before the admittance of new members. There is no opposition, thus the motion passed.
- DE handed in a procedural motion (mentioned previously; see above) to discuss a procedure where the Brussels office would simply announce when there's somebody in Mumble and then this person would simply put on loudspeaker.
- The meeting chair notes that as of now there is the opportunity to put sound on the system in the room. It is not needed to vote on it, as this procedure is already covered by the Rules of Procedure and the chair will do that of course, as preparations for exactly this were already done. The DE delegate "alios" is kindly asked to write Denis to the GA13 mail address in order to setup the Mumble. There is no formal Mumble channel, as it is not possible to monitor a live Mumble channel. Remote delegates shall signal their proxy that they want to have a voice statement. Denis is available on the Mumble (German) NRW server.
PP-BE is joining the meeting as remote delegate. 12 ordinary members are present.
- The chair notes that there was a lengthy block where members have been invited to where the statute amendments where discussed in detail. Furthermore the remote delegates had the opportunity to fill out a spreadsheet that was created by Nuno Cardoso from the PP-PT, where the input results in a matrix of amendments that would pass if put up to the vote with 12 members.
- The chair proposes to put up the whole block as a vote, first by telling the exact voting results that would come out, if the GA only had one vote on the statute amendments.
The chair pastes the spreadsheet link (again) in the IRC ( https://docs.google.com/a/pp-international.net/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuBWp4Spq3n0dHNtY2xOUFpHVFNqMTg3TDV5eHJwSFE#gid=0 )
- Poland asks whether they are accredited.
- The chair notes that they are not a member yet and can be accredited afterwards.
PP-CZ is joining the meeting as remote delegate. 13 ordinary members are present.
- Muriel from PP-CAT provided a message, which she wants to be read if #SAP-33 (the new proposal by Maxime Rouquet PP-FR) is not accepted.
The chair puts forward a motion to block vote of all amendments up to and including #SAP-32 (as stated in the spreadsheet). He summarizes what this would imply
- #SAP-1a rejected
- #SAP-1b rejected
- #SAP-2a rejected
- #SAP-2b accepted
- #SAP-8 accepted
- #SAP-9 rejected
- #SAP-11 accepted
- #SAP-12 accepted
- #SAP-13 accepted
- #SAP-14 accepted
- #SAP-17 rejected (including all motions)
- #SAP-18 accepted, as well as #SAP-18a
- #SAP-19 accepted, with #SAP-19a rejected and #SAP-19b accepted
- #SAP-20 rejected
- #SAP-21 rejected
- #SAP-22 accepted
- #SAP-23 accepted
- #SAP-24 accepted, as well as #SAP-24a and #SAP-24b
- #SAP-25 rejected
- #SAP-26 rejected
- #SAP-27 rejected
- #SAP-28 accepted
- #SAP-29 rejected
- #SAP-30 rejected
- #SAP-31 rejected
- #SAP-32 rejected
- The chair notes that #SAP-33 will not be included, as it is new and only four votes have been cast.
- The chair proposes that it is voted by show of hands about the whole block. If the block is accepted, as it has been just read, it becomes the status quo. If it is rejected in the vote, then it shall be voted on each and every statute amendment independently.
The relevant spreadsheet is projected on the wall.
5 minutes are given to remote delegates to cast their vote to their proxies.
- The chair notes that PP-CAT wants to have their statement read. The statement reads
- On request the chair notes that those proposals that got withdrawn are of course not voted on.
- PP-PT wants to provide a statement. The chair notes that voice will be given after closing of the voting
|Vote block on motion|
|Result||5 YES, 2 NO, 3 ABS => Vote block accepted|
#SAP-33 (regulations on number of ordinary members per country)
Maxime: There was the discussion that it should be one ordinary member per sovereign state and that there shall be a split in a confederation (or federation) if necessary if there are multiple groups. We thus put forward a new proposal which includes all elements that were in favour at the discussion block yesterday. It is a better balance amendment, please surpport to have a more clear statutes.
The new proposal #SAP-33 reads:
Sven asks whether there are futher statements for SAP-33; there are none. The vote on #SAP-33 is opened.
Special statement from PPI Borad concerning the non-accreditation of PP-NL: Sven mentions that there was a huge amount of confusion with the accreditation of Samir Allioui and Rodger van Doorn of PP-NL, as the vice-president and president sent a message just before the GA claimed are not in a position to represent PP-NL at the GA. Shortly after a second mail was recieved by secretary general of PP-NL, which claimed that the vice-president and the president had no say in international matter within PP-NL and thus Samir and Rodger are valid delegates of PPNL. Due to the conflicting signals and the short time span lead to the decision from meeting chair that the accreditition of PP-NL is not accepted.
|Vote on #SAP-33|
|Result||8 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => #SAP-33 is accepted|
PP-BR is joining the meeting IRL. 14 ordinary members are present.
PP-CR is joining the meeting as remote delegate. 15 ordinary members are present.
The chair notes that there was a request for invalidation by mail of the GA by PP-NL (due to non-accrediation).
MOP-4 (proposal on setting the membership fee)
The Swiss delegation exchanges their original MOP-4 by a new one. The new motion is published in a pastebin as a short workaround. ( http://pastebin.com/7G5XbwZ6 )The motion reads:
- UK asks whether there is a budget for PPI.
- Gregory tells about the financial situation concerning the old bank account in Brussels; access is not possible until the new statutes of PPI-HQ are published. Within the PPI board there was a first proposal that was approved which said that it will be mostly spent to organize PPI GAs and events. The fee proposal of PPCH does not change this financial budget approved by the PPI board. The board intends to publish a budget to the GA.
- CAT intends to motion to change so that observer members do not have to pay.
- Sven replies that CAT would not have to pay if the form a federation and that they shall submit the motion by mail
- "alios" (DE) shall join on Mumble in order to provide a statement by the loudspeaker. The power fuse seems to be killed by the process. The sound system is not working and the projector is also out for some time. The meeting is temporarily halted.
- The meeting chair opens the lunch till 13:00 local Kazan time ("13:00 sharp" due to time constraints)
Sunday, April 21, 2013 afternoon block
13:05 - Opening
The meeting is reopened by the chair at 13:05 Kazan local time.
Topic "member fee" continued
- DE says that they would support both motions
- CAT says that they will vote against until observer members don't have to pay.
- TN states that they can't pay in Euros.
- Sven notes that from his POV it's sufficent to pay the fee in any currency at the exchange rate into Euros at the day of decision making (i.e. in this case today, April 21st 2013)
The vote for the fee is opened. CAT opposes as their motion (observer members shall not pay the fee) was not taken into account, which they sent by mail on exempting observer members from a fee. The chair closes and voids the current vote.
The vote on the motion of CAT to exempt observer members is cast. The chair clarifies that YES means that "observer members do not pay".
|Vote whether observer members shall be exempted from a fee|
|Result||4 YES, 4 NO, 3 ABS => Tie. According to the statutes the motion is defeated.|
The vote on the annual member fee is cast, according to new proposal by PP-CH in pastebin (see above).
|Vote on annual fee as proposed|
|Result||5 YES, 3 NO, 0 ABS => The proposed fee is accepted.|
Acceptance of new members
- Gregory: The board is obliged to provide a recommendation to the GA according to the statutes. This was discussed in the last PPI board meeting. Based on the information that was provided the board states
- there were 14 organizations that filed an application for ordinary members before the deadline
- for all of the applications except Japan and Korea the board recommends acceptance
- for Japan and Korea the board was unable to decide on the issue as up to the date where the recommendation was done not enough information was provided then by the applicants. This does not mean that the board recommend to reject the applicants.
- there were 7 organizations that filed an application for observer members before the deadline
- for all of the applications as of observer members the board recommends acceptance
- the application for Belarus was changed by agreement in Belarus in favour of letting Pirate’s Center of Belarus become a member (they PP-BY is part of that); thus there is only one application as ordinary member by the Pirate’s Center of Belarus
- Maxime (FR) asks whether organization that applied as ordinary and are turned down, can instead be granted to become observer members
- Sven: Yes, the current members can file a motion to have them accepted as observer members, in case that they get defeated as ordinary members
- Question from PP-CH: concerning Belarus, which is the valid package of documents for the application of Belarus now?
- Mikhail (Belarus): the second set is the correct one.
There is a procedural motion by Portugal to recount the vote on membership fees. The meeting chair opens the vote on member fees again.
MOP-4 revisited (proposal on setting the membership fee)
|New vote on annual fee as proposed|
|Result||5 YES, 6 NO, 0 ABS => The proposed fee is defeated.|
The chair is astonished by situation. He insists to note that should not be the case that recounts are used for changing the vote results as only purpose.
Topic "acceptance of new members" continued
PP-CH proposes a motion that newly approved members are only becoming a member today if they are present, otherwise tomorrow. The vote is cast.
|Motion to get acceptance of newly approved members in effect by tomorrow, if not present in person|
|Result||9 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => The motion is accepted.|
- Fabrizio (PP-DE) (via mumble): Belgium is not able to give their vote as their proxies do not respond.
- Sven: It's up to the parties to arrange a common protocoll for exchange. If that doesn't work the chair can act on that. As to our knowledge the proxy of Belgium does respond.
- Proxy: I think the problem is the lagging with Skype, so sometimes the answer arrives after the vote is closed; that happened with the membership fee.
- Sven: Then we will grant a timeframe of 4 minutes for remotes.
Votes on ordinary members
PP-RU motions to have the vote on all applicants en bloc. The vote on the motion is cast.
|Motion to get acceptance of newly approved members in effect by tomorrow, if not present in person|
|Result||7 YES, 4 NO, 0 ABS => The motion is defeated (2/3 majority is not met)|
Denis takes the lead of the meeting chair and Sven takes the meeting chair assistance position
Single votes on the acceptance of new members are cast.
|Vote on accepting Latvia (PP-LV)|
|Result||7 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => Latvia is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Slovakia (PP-SK)|
|Result||8 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => Slovakia is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Ukraine (PP-UA)|
|Result||8 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => Ukraine is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Bosnia-Herzegowina (PP-BA)|
|Result||9 YES, 0 NO, 1 ABS => Bosnia-Herzegowina is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Estonia (PP-EE)|
|Result||9 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => Estonia is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Belarus (PP-BY)|
|Result||9 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => Belarus is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Tunisia (PP-TN)|
|Result||10 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS => Tunisia is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Israel (PP-IL)|
|Result||8 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => Israel is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Hungary (PP-HU)|
|Result||8 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => Hungary is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Iceland (PP-IS)|
|Result||10 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS => Iceland is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Turkey (PP-TR)|
|Result||9 YES, 0 NO, 1 ABS => Turkey is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Poland (PP-PL)|
|Result||10 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => Poland is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Japan (PP-JP)|
|Result||9 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS => Japan is accepted as ordinary member|
|Vote on accepting Republic of Korea (PP-KR)|
|Result||8 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS => Latvia is accepted as ordinary member|
Inbetween there were discussions concerning whether Belgium had the possibility to vote again. The proxy recieved the spreadsheet with the votes on the statute amendments, but which are not a topic anymore.
Votes on observer members
Denis: Does anyone object to vote on them en bloc? France does object; thus the votes are cast separately
|Vote on accepting PP Berlin|
|Result||9 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS => PP Berlin is accepted as observer member|
|Vote on accepting Young Pirates of Sweden (Ung Pirat)|
|Result||10 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS => Ung Pirat is accepted as observer member|
|Vote on accepting Best Party of Iceland|
|Result||9 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS => Best Party of Iceland is accepted as observer member|
|Vote on accepting Piratpartiet (PP-SE)|
|Result||11 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS => PP-SE is accepted as observer member|
|Vote on accepting PP Tyrol|
|Result||11 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS => Tyrol is accepted as observer member|
|Vote on accepting PP-LV|
|Result||11 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS => La Rioja is accepted as observer member|
14:20 break till 14:30 announced so the meeting chair can reorder things
14:35 - Report of board members
The delegates of the newly admitted PP-BY, PP-IL, PP-JP, PP-PL and PP-TR are joining the meeting.
- Lola Voronina's report is read aloud by Denis. Lola expresses her frustration with certain developments with pirates, which lead her to stop continuing her work in December. Nevertheless she is grateful for the constructive pirates and aspects.
- Gregory reads his report. It is split into a political and an internal part. Gregory presents several lobbying efforts at WIPO, UNESO and other international organizations; PPI is now also listed as official lobbying organization at the EU. Support was granted to the EFF-campaign against including DRM in HTML standards. Iceland and Israel had elections. The intent to setup an online GA met several hurdles and once setup did not recieve the necessary quorum. He closes with an outlook about the future tasks for the pirate movement. The report will be sent out to pp-leaders.
- Jelena said she would write up a report.
- Denis provides a report on his work. Firstly he concentrated on building up a press team, which was run on a minimum level as it became obvious that there was not a huge amount of participation. Secondly he invested time into becoming a WIPO member, which was not accepted yet; however Denis got the opportunity to be a visitor with KEI.
- Denis asks whether the reports by Ed and Nuno shall be read. No one speaks up.
- Travis did not provide a report
Co-Chairperson elections (2 positions)
Sven takes over the lead of the meeting again
The chair refers to the wiki page with board candidatures http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Conference_2013/Board_candidatures http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Conference_2013/Board_candidatures
The chair lists the co-chairperson candidates
- Bc. Vojtěch Pikal (sponsored by CZ)
- Gregory Engels (sponsored by DE)
- Thijs Markus 'Ikke' (sponsored by PT)
Presentation of candidates
- The chair reads aloud the text Pikals wrote in the wiki, as he is not available atm and appears not to be represented by someone.
- Gregory presents himself.
- Sven reads aloud the text Thijs wrote in the wiki, as he is not available atm and appears not to be represented by someone.
Sven explains the voting procedure. The vote is cast and counted.
Coffee break till 15:45
|Election of PPI board chair|
|Bc. Vojtěch Pikal||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||12 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS|
|Gregory Engels||No||No||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||9 YES, 4 NO, 1 ABS|
|Thijs Markus 'Ikke'||Yes||Yes||No||Abs||No||Yes||Yes||Abs||No||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Abs||7 YES, 4 NO, 3 ABS|
|Result||Bc. Vojtěch Pikal and Gregory Engels are elected as PPI co-chair|
3 votes were recieved after the election was closed by the chair and were thus not considered. The voting data is listed in the following table
|Bc. Vojtěch Pikal||Yes||Yes||Yes||3 YES, 0 NO, 0 ABS|
|Gregory Engels||No||Yes||No||1 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS|
|Thijs Markus 'Ikke'||No||Yes||No||1 YES, 2 NO, 0 ABS|
Other board members (5 positions)
Denis will not do the chair meeting assistance anymore as Denis will be a candidate; Alexis Roussel replaces him
Presentation of candidates
- Gabdrakhmanov Azat PP-RU (IRL presentation)
- Denis 'SciFi' Simonet PP-CH (IRL presentation)
Artem Libkind aka Llanowar PP-RU(does not run anymore)
- Thomas Gaul PP-DE (text read by Sven)
- Marc Tholl PP-LU (IRL presentation)
- Nuno Cardoso aka nonnu PP-PT (text read by Sven)
During the presentation it became clear that Artem Libkind does not intend to run for the election anymore; this was noted, but the forms for the election had been already printed at this time.
|Election of other PPI board members|
|Gabdrakhmanov Azat||Yes||No||No||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||12 YES, 4 NO, 2 ABS|
|Denis 'SciFi' Simonet||No||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Abs||13 YES, 2 NO, 3 ABS|
||Yes||No||No||Abs||Abs||No||Abs||No||Abs||Abs||Abs||No||Abs||Abs||Abs||Abs||Abs||Abs||(1 YES, 5 NO, 12 ABS)|
|Thomas Gaul||Yes||No||No||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||13 YES, 4 NO, 1 ABS|
|Marc Tholl||Yes||No||No||No||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Abs||Abs||11 YES, 5 NO, 2 ABS|
|Nuno Cardoso aka nonnu||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||15 YES, 2 NO, 1 ABS|
|Result||All running candidates are elected as board member|
Alternate board members (4 positions)
|Election of PPI alternate board members|
|Fabricio Do Canto||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||No||No||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||12 YES, 4 NO, 2 ABS|
|Keith Goldstein||No||Abs||Yes||No||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||No||Yes||Abs||Abs||10 YES, 4 NO, 4 ABS|
|Radoslaw Pietron||Yes||Yes||Abs||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||13 YES, 2 NO, 3 ABS|
|Paul Bossu||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||14 YES, 2 NO, 2 ABS|
|Yasin Aydin||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||No||Yes||Yes||Abs||12 YES, 2 NO, 4 ABS|
|Jelena Jovanovic||No||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||15 YES, 1 NO, 2 ABS|
|Market Gregorova||Yes||Abs||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Abs||Abs||11 YES, 1 NO, 6 ABS|
|Result||Elected as alternate board members: Jelena (1st), Paul (2nd), Radoslaw (3rd); tie between Fabricio da Canto and Yasin Airin for the fourth position|
A second vote inbetween Fabricio Do Canto and Yasin Aydin is cast and counted
|Election of PPI alternate board members (2nd round for place 4)|
|Fabricio Do Canto||No||Yes||Yes||No||Abs||No||Yes||Abs||Yes||No||Abs||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||7 YES, 6 NO, 3 ABS|
|Yasin Aydin||Yes||No||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||No||No||Yes||9 YES, 5 NO, 2 ABS|
|Result||Yasin Aydin is elected as 4th alternate board member|
Court of Arbitration elections (3 to 7 positions)
8 pirates step forward as candidates for the Court of Arbitration (CoA):
- Benjamin Siggel PP-DE
- Andrew Norton PP-NL / PP-AU
- Arturo Martínez PP-CAT
- Keith Goldstein PP-IL
- Maxime Rouquet PP-FR
- Thomas Bruderer PP-CH
- Henrique Peer PP-BR
- Fabricio Do Canto PP-DE
The vote for the CoA is prepared.
Support for resolution "Pirate Movement is not Sea Piracy"
A motion is filed by PP-RU: A resolution shall be supported that explains that Pirate Movement Ideology has nothing to do with sea piracy, which is the reason why the Ministry of Justice in Russia turned down the registration of PP-RU twice. The text is read IRL and will be sent to the delegates.
The delegates are called to sign the resolution if they support it.
CoA elections continued
The vote for the CoA is cast and counted
|Election of members of the Court of Arbitration|
|Benjamin Siggel||Yes||No||No||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Abs||Yes||No||9 YES, 5 NO, 2 ABS|
|Andrew Norton||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||No||Yes||No||Yes||No||Yes||Abs||No||No||Yes||Abs||8 YES, 6 NO, 2 ABS|
|Arturo Martínez||Yes||No||No||No||Yes||No||No||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Abs||8 YES, 6 NO, 2 ABS|
|Keith Goldstein||Yes||No||No||No||Yes||Yes||No||Abs||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||No||Abs||Yes||Abs||7 YES, 6 NO, 3 ABS|
|Maxime Rouquet||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||15 YES, 1 NO, 0 ABS|
|Thomas Bruderer||Yes||No||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Abs||11 YES, 2 NO, 3 ABS|
|Henrique Peer||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||14 YES, 1 NO, 1 ABS|
|Fabricio Do Canto||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||Yes||No||Yes||Abs||Yes||No||No||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||No||9 YES, 5 NO, 2 ABS|
|Result||Elected as CoA members announced by the chair: Benjamin, Maxime, Thomas, Henrique, Fabricio|
Note by the editor: there is currently a discussion concerning the question whether and why the chair did not announce Andrew and Arturo as elected at the international mailing list
Lay auditor elections (3 positions)
4 pirates step forward as lay auditor candidates:
- Pat Mächler PP-CH
- Sven Clement PP-LU
- Arturo Martínez PP-CAT
- Keith Goldstein PP-IL
A vote is cast and counted.
|Election of lay auditors|
|Pat Mächler||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||Abs||13 YES, 0 NO, 3 ABS|
|Sven Clement||No||Abs||Yes||Yes||Abs||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||12 YES, 1 NO, 3 ABS|
|Arturo Martínez||Yes||Abs||No||No||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||11 YES, 3 NO, 2 ABS|
|Keith Goldstein||Yes||Abs||Yes||No||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Yes||Abs||13 YES, 1 NO, 2 ABS|
|Result||Elected as lay auditors: Pat, Sven, Keith|
Motion for resolution "Worldwide Democracy"
PP-DE puts forward a motion for a PPI resolution that reads:
|Vote on accepting the resolution|
|Result||14 YES, 0 NO, 2 ABS => The motion is passed|
Motion for "suspending new applications"
PP-ES puts forward a motion that reads:
|Vote on accepting the resolution|
|Result||0 YES, 8 NO, 9 ABS => The motion is defeated|
The meeting chair provides some closing words and wishes farewell.
The chair closes the conference at 18:30