Re: [Int-koordination] [pp-leaders.discussion] [Board] Fwd: [pp-leaders] CoA complaint: motions relating to affiliation fees

["Irene Labner PPT" <irene.labner AT piratenpartei-tirol.at>]

Hy there!

As representant of the Pirate Party of Tyrol (Observer Member of the PPI) I 
am wondering about this conversation.
I thougt this conversation was about membership fees, but now there´s 
accusations, but no facts.
What´s up there?
Is there a problem about the PPI in general or only about Thomas Gaul.
I can´t get the point. Please tell me.

Yours
Irene
Pirate Party of Tyrol

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Denis Simonet" <denis.simonet AT piratenpartei.ch>
To: "Andrew Norton" <ktetch AT ktetch.co.uk>; 
<pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net>; 
<int-koordination AT lists.piratenpartei.de>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2014 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: [pp-leaders.discussion] [Board] Fwd: [pp-leaders] CoA 
complaint: motions relating to affiliation fees


> Dear Andrew,
>
> > As a board member for which there is still a pending complaint about
> > violations of practices and procedures (against the Board prior to this
> > one, for their actions leading up to Paris, which you were a member, as
> > was Thomas), and as another of the group that has been at the center of
> > the consistent mismanagement of PPI, I will decline for the exact same
> > reasons as for Thomas, in that you are similarly as tainted he is.
>
> Did I get right that your accusations are also addressed to my person?
>
>
> > Seriously, could he not find someone not involved in the PPI's mass
> > incompetence to try and repeat his question.
>
> He did not contact me, it was my own will to ask the same. As PP
> Germany, also PP Switzerland is interested in details on your claims -
> and I am quite sure that many other PPI members would like to know the
> details.
>
>
> > I understand the concept of 'conflict of interest' seems to be one
> > current and recent board members of PPI have a difficult time
> > understanding, Nevertheless, that is the case. You don't have the
> > accused leading the "investigation". I assume both PP-DE and PPCh know
> > this, and so suspect that both your request, and Thomas' are done not on
> > the basis of official requests from the party leadership, but on the
> > basis of your own determination.
>
> The concept of 'conflicht of interest' is about taking decisions, not
> about being informed of details about accusations.
>
>
> > Likewise, I'd also think that if the "Party" (specifically the
> > leadership) were interested in the accusations, they'd contact me
> > directly, rather than send a go-between that may be implicated. That
> > just doesn't sound 'smart'. Does it sound smart to you? No, didn't think 
> > so.
>
> I am also a board member of PP-CH, so part of the leadership. Or do you
> also make a difference there? If yes: We have a tresurer, a president,
> some vice presidents and other board members. Whom of them are you
> willing to reply?
>
> Denis
>
>
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > > "As this is massive. Could you please elaborate your accusations? In
> > > broad and in details as well."
> >
> > > Thank you in advance.
> >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Denis
> >
> >
> > > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> >
> >
> > > -------- Original message --------
> > > From: Andrew Norton <ktetch AT ktetch.co.uk>
> > > Date:19/12/2014 23:12 (GMT+01:00)
> > > To: pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net,
> > > "int-koordination AT lists.piratenpartei.de >> 'internationale
> > > Koordination'" <int-koordination AT lists.piratenpartei.de>
> > > Cc:
> > > Subject: Re: [pp-leaders.discussion] [Board] Fwd: [pp-leaders] CoA
> > > complaint: motions relating to affiliation fees
> >
> > > Frankly, I don't care if you're swapping hats at will. Unless Thomas
> > > Gaul the PPI Board member at person-at-issue is not just physically
> > > different from Thomas Gaul the PP-DE 'rep', but not closely tied with
> > > them either, then there is a clear conflict of interest.
> >
> > > Your demands despite this underscore your unsuitability for any kind of
> > > role.
> >
> > > As you yourself note, you're not even the 'only' representative, but
> > > just "one of the official representatives of PP-DE." in your own words.
> > > Thus there is no requirement that it involve you in any capacity as
> > > representing the PP-DE in this regards.
> >
> > > Also, forgive me for saying, but your credibility with me (and others)
> > > is completely spent. You have constantly said one thing, and done
> > > another. So to your 'take it or leave it', I've 'leave' your demand.
> >
> > > In fact, any and all of your emails will now be kill-filed. I have no
> > > time for habitual liars, whose emails are nothing but self-serving
> > > missives. As such your emails are not even worth the storage space.
> >
> > > If anyone with a shred of competency, and credibility at PP-DE wishes to
> > > enquire about the issues, They know how to contact me. But I do not
> > > answer to you, no matter how important you *think* you are, or how many
> > > demands you make, or whatever names you *claim* to represent. I've
> > > fallen for that from you before, and will no longer make that mistake.
> >
> > > Andrew
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 12/19/2014 4:09 PM, Thomas Gaul wrote:
> > > > Dear Andrew!
> >
> > > > Take it or leave it.  I am acting on behalf of PP-DE.
> >
> > > > And if PP-DE asks through me, please answer. Here and now!
> >
> > > > Me being part of the board of PPI is a different matter (Roles
> > > issues). If it shows me as a member of the board in a way not being
> > > appropriate as a member of the board of PPI - so it is.  The Pirate
> > > Party of Germany is interested in your accusations and I asked on behalf
> > > of the Pirate Party! And afair I am one of the official representatives
> > > of PP-DE.
> >
> > > > Any answer you deliver is appropriate. That's one of the reasons I
> > > integrated an internal German ML. Please deliver your elaboration about
> > > the accusations. It is deemed to be public!
> >
> > > > And aside from PP-DE - the accusation had been against the board of
> > > PPI. Of the more interest is there for PP-DE to receive the information
> > > and if necessary the board of PP-DE will see fit to act.
> >
> > > > And just to let you know, the ones responsible within the board of
> > > PP-DE are actively involved on this specific mailing list.
> >
> > > > Please deliver the information! ASAP!
> >
> > > > Thank you very much for your help in advance!
> >
> > > > Thomas Gaul
> >
> >
> > > > internationaler Koordinator - international Coordinator
> > > > Piratenpartei Deutschland - Pirate Party of Germany, Pflugstraße 9a,
> > > D-10115 Berlin, Germany
> >
> > > > Die Piratenpartei Deutschland wird gemeinschaftlich vertreten von
> > > Stefan Körner (Vorsitzender) Carsten Sawosch (Stellvertretender
> > > Vorsitzender) Stefan Bartels (Schatzmeister) Stepanie Schmiedke
> > > (Generalsekretärin) Kristos Thingilouthis (Politischer Geschäftsführer)
> > > Lothar Krauß (Stellvertretender Schatzmeister) Mark Huger
> > > (Stellvertretender Generalsekretär) Bernd Schreiner (Stellvertretender
> > > politischer Geschäftsführer) und Michael Ebner (Zweiter
> > > Stellvertretender Generalsekretär)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > > Von: pp-leaders.discussion
> > > [mailto:pp-leaders.discussion-bounces AT lists.pp-international.net] Im
> > > Auftrag von Andrew Norton
> > > > Gesendet: Freitag, 19. Dezember 2014 20:42
> > > > An: Thomas Gaul; pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > > Cc: 'internationale Koordination'
> > > > Betreff: Re: [pp-leaders.discussion] Fwd: [pp-leaders] CoA complaint:
> > > motions relating to affiliation fees
> >
> > > > On 12/19/2014 2:36 PM, Thomas Gaul wrote:
> > > > > Dear Andrew!
> >
> > > > > You wrote concerning PPI:  "Currently, it is not. It is an
> > > organisation that is fundamentally corrupt, inept, and devoid of purpose
> > > or accountability."
> >
> > > > > As this is massive. Could you please elaborate your accusations? In
> > > broad and in details as well. I am asking this on behalf of the Pirate
> > > Party of Germany.
> >
> > > > Dear Thomas,
> >
> > > > Since you are one of those at the very center of the issue, I hardly
> > > think it's appropriate. By all means if the Pirate Party of Germany
> > > wants to know, then by all means have them contact me. Your enquiry
> > > would be a significant conflict of interest, no? A lot like a police
> > > department "investigating" the misconduct of its own officers.
> >
> > > > Andrew
> >
> >
> > > > > Best regards
> >
> > > > > Thomas
> >
> > > > > internationaler Koordinator - international Coordinator Piratenpartei
> > > > > Deutschland - Pirate Party of Germany, Pflugstraße 9a, D-10115 Berlin,
> > > > > Germany
> >
> > > > > Die Piratenpartei Deutschland wird gemeinschaftlich vertreten von
> > > > > Stefan Körner (Vorsitzender) Carsten Sawosch (Stellvertretender
> > > > > Vorsitzender) Stefan Bartels (Schatzmeister) Stepanie Schmiedke
> > > > > (Generalsekretärin) Kristos Thingilouthis (Politischer
> > > > > Geschäftsführer) Lothar Krauß (Stellvertretender Schatzmeister) Mark
> > > > > Huger (Stellvertretender Generalsekretär) Bernd Schreiner
> > > > > (Stellvertretender politischer Geschäftsführer) und Michael Ebner
> > > > > (Zweiter Stellvertretender Generalsekretär)
> >
> > > > > On 12/19/2014 5:54 AM, Josef Ohlsson Collentine wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> >
> > > > > > I can only see bad things coming from CoA dealing with it no matter
> > > > > > what they decide... We all know PPI statutes are a complete mess so
> > > > > > leaning on them as hard as has been done here is just abusing the
> > > > > > current mess PPI is in. The complaint might definitely hold true but
> > > > > > what is accomplished? Would encourage PPAU to withdraw this complaint
> > > > > > for the greater good of PPI.
> >
> > > > > Can you imagine what the press would say about Pirate Parties, if
> > > they had turned around on, say, ACTA and said 'hey, everyone protesting
> > > about ACTA, hush up, I can only see bad things coming from making a lot
> > > of noise on it - we know it's a complete mess, and the complaint's
> > > probably true, but what will be accomplished? We encourage people to
> > > withdraw their complaints against ACTA for the greater good of the EU"
> >
> > > > > They'd string you up!
> >
> > > > > One of the fundamental principles of the Pirate movement is open
> > > democratic methods, evidence-based principles, and accountability and
> > > transparency. You are suggesting we (as a whole) abandon these
> > > principles, 'for the greater good of PPI'. WHAT GREATER GOOD? To whose
> > > benefit?
> >
> > > > > For that matter, what 'good'? Name one good thing PPI has done in the
> > > past 3 years? I don't know about you, Josef, but as an elected officer
> > > of a PPI member (A Governor of PPUK), and officer relating to another
> > > (Vice chair of USPP, which includes the Observer-member PPFlorida) it's
> > > my duty to investigate if PPI is compatible with the basic ideals and
> > > fundamentals of these parties.
> >
> > > > > Currently, it is not. It is an organisation that is fundamentally
> > > corrupt, inept, and devoid of purpose or accountability. I believe PPAU
> > > has come to the same conclusions, and has given the PPI one last chance
> > > to redeem itself by acting in the way it should.
> >
> > > > > However, one thing really insulted me. "for the greater good of PPI".
> > > It reminded me of the film Hot Fuzz. You know, where the 'cabal' at the
> > > center did whatever they could to preserve the ideal they had at
> > > everyone else's expense "for the greater good".
> >
> > > > > Also the same thing Dick Cheney, and Rep. Peter "IRA supporter" King
> > > have said over the last week about the CIA Torture, that it was "for the
> > > greater good". If any phrase has ever underscored that something is
> > > "wrong" (and they know it), it's that something is "for the greater
> > > good", and has been used to justify pretty much every 'major bad thing',
> > > EVER. Should probably qualify as Godwin-ing on its own.
> >
> > > > > So, the question remains. Is PPI a 'pirate"  organisation, or will it
> > > continue to act in direct defiance of the Pirate movement?
> >
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > > Governor, PPUK
> > > > > Vice Chairman, USPP
> > > > > Vice Chairman, PPGa(US)
> >
> > > > > (speaking as myself, and not as an official statement from those
> > > > > parties)
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > > What is the real motive for bringing this up now? Causing more
> > > > > > internal chaos within PPI? Avoiding PPAU fees?
> >
> > > > > > Kindly,
> > > > > > Josef
> >
> > > > > > *International Contact for PPSE*
> > > > > > Contact me for any questions/concerns or if you need to get hold of
> > > > > > someone in Piratpartiet or internationally.
> >
> > > > > > /Other contact:/
> > > > > > mail: international AT piratpartiet.se
> > > > > > <mailto:international AT piratpartiet.se>
> > > > > > Twitter: @collentine
> > > > > > Skype: josef.ohlsson.collentine (only important conversations)
> > > > > > Cel: +46 73 824 98 49 (text me, if urgent)
> >
> > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > > > > From: *Brendan Molloy* <brendan.molloy AT pirateparty.org.au
> > > > > > <mailto:brendan.molloy AT pirateparty.org.au>>
> > > > > > Date: Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 2:06 AM
> > > > > > Subject: [pp-leaders] CoA complaint: motions relating to affiliation
> > > > > > fees
> > > > > > To: Court of Arbitration <coa AT pp-international.net
> > > > > > <mailto:coa AT pp-international.net>>
> > > > > > Cc: "pp-leaders AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > > > > <mailto:pp-leaders AT lists.pp-international.net>"
> > > > > > <pp-leaders AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > > > > <mailto:pp-leaders AT lists.pp-international.net>>
> >
> > > > > > Dear Court of Arbitration,
> >
> > > > > > Please accept our following complaint for consideration.
> >
> > > > > > An HTML version of the complaint is available here:
> >
> > > > > > https://gist.github.com/bbqsrc/fc7a05121272a23804f1/730b5ae96e1912ea5
> > > > > > 2
> > > > > > bbb3697084e27cc0157a26
> >
> > > > > > Please acknowledge receipt of this email as soon as possible.
> >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> >
> > > > > > ## Complaint
> >
> > > > > > PPAU requests that the Court of Arbitration hears a challenge against
> > > > > > motions relating to affiliation fees at the 2014 General Assembly,
> > > > > > specifically due to recent minutes of the PPI Board indicating that
> > > > > > they are likely to move ahead with attempts to acquire fees from
> > > > > > members.
> >
> > > > > > PPAU consents to abide by the decision of the Court of Arbitration.
> >
> > > > > > ## Challenge
> >
> > > > > > This challenge relates to CoA powers [XIVa(3)(a), (b), and
> > > > > > (e)][XIVa], and relates to the functioning of the General Assembly
> > > and PPI Board.
> >
> > > > > > ### Validity of affiliation fee-related motions
> >
> > > > > > The minutes in question can be found here:
> > > > > > http://wiki.pp-international.net/Minutes_of_GA_2014
> >
> > > > > > As there are no titles in the minutes, we cannot link to the relevant
> > > > > > section.
> >
> > > > > > Please search for the following to find it:
> >
> > > > > > > delay or not 9.5 in favour, 12 opposed, 2 abstentions Result: we
> > > > > > > discuss the hight of the fees now
> >
> > > > > > As the minutes are a complete mess, we have attempted to decipher as
> > > > > > best as possible what the actual proposals were to begin with, and
> > > > > > what the conclusion is.
> >
> > > > > > PPAU would like to note for posterity that these minutes are not of
> > > > > > the quality expected of an international organisation and the members
> > > > > > should seriously consider ensuring that the quality of the minutes is
> > > > > > significantly improved in the future.
> >
> > > > > > Based on our analysis we believe the events to be as follows:
> >
> > > > > > * "Board MOP for Membership fees at PPI" begins
> > > > > > * Discussion occurs.
> > > > > > * A vote to delay voting and discussion does not carry.
> > > > > > * A vote on whether or not to discuss Gregory Engels' proposed
> > > > > >   HDI-based fees or a "1/10 proposal", which seems to mean 10% of the
> > > > > >   original HDI-based proposal.
> > > > > > * That vote results in a discussion of the 1/10 proposal.
> > > > > > * A motion by PPEE that parties with less than 500 members will 
> > > > > > choose
> > > > > >   their own fees, seems to have carried but is not noted in the
> > > > > >   minutes.
> > > > > > * A motion to have voluntary fees for all seem to not carry, not 
> > > > > > noted.
> > > > > > * A motion whether fees are wanted at all, based on the tenuous 
> > > > > > phrase
> > > > > >   in brackets "based on what we decided for so far" carries with 
> > > > > > 55.8%
> > > > > >   support (not including abstentions).
> > > > > > * The minutes then assert that what had been agreed to is as follows:
> >
> > > > > > > There will be membership fees, 1/10th of the original proposal,
> > > > > > > parties with less than 500 members can pay as much as they want (but
> > > > > > > a minimum of more than 0€), there are no penalties for not paying,
> > > > > > > observer membership is also not associated with any costs, the first
> > > > > > > fees are due for the next financial year (which begins tomorrow)
> >
> > > > > > PPAU fails to see how such a result could be derived as:
> >
> > > > > > * No conclusive vote as to the mechanism for determining the fees was
> > > > > >   carried, specifically no motion carried that meets the requirements
> > > > > >   of [XVI(1) or (2)][XVI];
> > > > > > * A feelings-based motion on whether fees are wanted carries, but it
> > > > > >   is a tenuous, meaningless motion, that is also not valid as per the
> > > > > >   statutes due to [XI(2)][XI], which stipulates that annual 
> > > > > > affiliation
> > > > > >   fee motions must meet a two-thirds threshold;
> > > > > > * PPEE's motion does not specify that the fees must be greater than 
> > > > > > 0,
> > > > > >   and therefore the assertion is again false;
> > > > > > * Notwithstanding the above, due to no fee as per [XVI(1)][XVI] being
> > > > > >   determined, PPEE's motion is therefore irrelevant for the time
> > > > > > being;
> > > > > > * "No penalties" was not agreed to nor discussed, and is also false 
> > > > > > due
> > > > > >   to [XI(5)][XI], which stipulates that failure to pay fees can 
> > > > > > result
> > > > > >   in voting rights being suspended;
> > > > > > * No discussion or vote was taken regarding fees for observer 
> > > > > > members,
> > > > > >   and therefore the tenuous assertion is without purpose or merit as
> > > > > >   it bears no relevance to the discussion at hand; and
> > > > > > * No vote affirming the complex assertion being questioned here is
> > > > > >   recorded within the minutes.
> >
> > > > > > #### Relevant statutes:
> >
> > > > > > > XI Voting
> >
> > > > > > > [~snip~]
> >
> > > > > > > (2) Decisions concerning the admission of new Members (section III.
> > > > > > > paragraph 4), the exclusion of Members (section VII, paragraph 2),
> > > > > > > the determination of the annual affiliation fee (section XVI,
> > > > > > > paragraph 1) and the amendment of this[sic] Statutes (section XX),
> > > > > > > shall be passed by a two thirds majority of the votes cast.
> >
> > > > > > > [~snip~]
> >
> > > > > > > XV. Funding
> >
> > > > > > > Pirate Parties International expenditure shall be covered by:
> >
> > > > > > > a) affiliation fees from the Ordinary Members parties and those with
> > > > > > > Observer status,
> >
> > > > > > > [~snip~]
> >
> > > > > > > XVI. Affiliation Fees
> >
> > > > > > > (1) The amount of the fee is determined annually by the General
> > > > > > > Assembly.
> >
> > > > > > > (2) The affiliation fees and contributions shall be fixed in
> > > > > > > relation to the finances and membership of parties.
> >
> > > > > > [XI(2)][XI] clearly stipulates that motions relating to [XVI(1)][XVI]
> > > > > > must carry with a two-thirds majority of votes cast.
> >
> > > > > > [XV(a)][XV] implies that observer members should be included in any
> > > > > > calculation of affiliation fees in [XVI][XVI].
> >
> > > > > > [XVI][XVI] as a whole seems to imply that (1) should be a fixed
> > > > > > number, and that (2) should apply a formula to that number
> > > > > > consistently in relation to size and finances of a party, without
> > > exception.
> >
> > > > > > ### Suitability of PPI board accepting affiliation fees at this time
> >
> > > > > > Recent minutes of the PPI board state that the board intends to soon
> > > > > > begin requesting membership fees, but these very same minutes put
> > > > > > into question whether or not the banking situation has been resolved
> > > > > > sufficiently to begin taking large amounts of money from around the
> > > > > > world.
> >
> > > > > > Relevant URLs:
> >
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Minutes_2014-11-29#3_Short_Repor
> > > > > > t
> > > > > > s
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Minutes_2014-12-09#3_Short_Repor
> > > > > > t
> > > > > > s
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Minutes_2014-12-09#7_Financial_S
> > > > > > i
> > > > > > tuation
> > > > > > *
> > > > > > http://wiki.pp-international.net/PPI_Minutes_2014-12-09#8_AOB_.28bein
> > > > > > g
> > > > > > _urgent.29
> >
> > > > > > #### Relevant Statutes:
> >
> > > > > > > XVII. Treasurer
> >
> > > > > > > [~snip~]
> >
> > > > > > > (3) The Board is responsible for the sound financial management of
> > > > > > > Pirate Parties International.
> >
> > > > > > [XVII][XVII] is an odd place to put a requirement of the PPI board to
> > > > > > be sure, but it is a requirement of the statutes that the board
> > > > > > soundly manages the finances of PPI, and this has been put into
> > > question.
> >
> > > > > > ## Requests
> >
> > > > > > We request that the Court of Arbitration does the following:
> >
> > > > > > 1. Immediately introduces an injunction against the PPI board 
> > > > > > regarding
> > > > > >    requesting or accepting membership fees until this case is
> > > > > >    concluded, as per the powers of [XIVa(1) and (3)(a)][XIVa]; 2.
> > > > > > Makes a determination that "fixed in relation to the finances and
> > > > > >    membership of parties" should be interpreted to mean a 
> > > > > > consistently
> > > > > >    applied formula for determining fees based on that criteria, 
> > > > > > without
> > > > > >    exception;
> > > > > > 3. Makes a determination that the General Assembly did not approve 
> > > > > > any
> > > > > >    affiliation fee that would meet the requirements of [XVI(1)][XVI],
> > > > > >    either due to lack of a motion meeting those requirements, or a
> > > > > >    motion failing to carry due to the requirements of [XI(2)][XI]; 4.
> > > > > > Makes a determination that motions relating to affiliation fees must
> > > > > >    meet all of the requirements of [XI(2)][XI],
> > > > > >    [XVI(1) and XVI(2)][XVI];
> > > > > > 5. Makes a determination as to whether or not [XVI][XVI] applies to
> > > > > >    observer members, as [XV(a)][XV] seems to imply; 6. Makes a
> > > > > > determination as to whether or not the current PPI board is
> > > > > >    meeting the requirements of [XVII(3)][XVII], which is necessary 
> > > > > > for
> > > > > >    the purpose of knowing whether it is safe to send affiliation fees
> > > > > >    to the PPI board. Should the board be found to not be meeting 
> > > > > > these
> > > > > >    requirements, they should be required to apply to the CoA for a
> > > > > >    determination on whether they meet [XVII(3)][XVII] prior to
> > > > > >    requesting any affiliation fees in the future, and; 7. Makes a
> > > > > > determination that any attempt by the PPI board to accrue
> > > > > >    affiliation fees to be without authority or basis until a future
> > > > > >    General Assembly resolves otherwise.
> >
> > > > > > [XI]: http://wiki.pp-international.net/Statutes#XI._Voting
> > > > > > [XIVa]:
> > > > > > http://wiki.pp-international.net/Statutes#XIVa._Court_of_Arbitration
> > > > > > [XV]: http://wiki.pp-international.net/Statutes#XV._Funding
> > > > > > [XVI]:
> > > > > > http://wiki.pp-international.net/Statutes#XVI._Affiliation_Fees
> > > > > > [XVII]: http://wiki.pp-international.net/Statutes#XVII._Treasurer
> >
> >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > pp-leaders mailing list
> > > > > > pp-leaders AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > > > > <mailto:pp-leaders AT lists.pp-international.net>
> > > > > > http://lists.pp-international.net/listinfo/pp-leaders
> >
> >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > pp-leaders.discussion mailing list
> > > > > > pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > > > > http://lists.pp-international.net/listinfo/pp-leaders.discussion
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > pp-leaders.discussion mailing list
> > > > pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > > http://lists.pp-international.net/listinfo/pp-leaders.discussion
> >
> >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > pp-leaders.discussion mailing list
> > > > pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > > http://lists.pp-international.net/listinfo/pp-leaders.discussion
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > pp-leaders.discussion mailing list
> > > pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net
> > > http://lists.pp-international.net/listinfo/pp-leaders.discussion
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pp-leaders.discussion mailing list
> pp-leaders.discussion AT lists.pp-international.net
> http://lists.pp-international.net/listinfo/pp-leaders.discussion