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

[Andrew Norton <ktetch AT ktetch.co.uk>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/19/2014 5:33 PM, Denis Simonet wrote:
> Dear Andrew,
> 
> As an international coordinator for Pirate Party Switzerland, I would
> like to pick up Thomas' questions:

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.

Seriously, could he not find someone not involved in the PPI's mass
incompetence to try and repeat his question.

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.

Here's an idea, there's supposedly 'procedures' in place for this sort
of thing. Why not use them? You can be certain that I am availing myself
of the procedures available to me.

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.


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

- -- 
Andrew Norton
http://ktetch.co.uk
Tel: +1(352)6-KTETCH [+1-352-658-3824]
Twitter: @ktetch
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUlK1WAAoJECjjuYTW3X5Hkb4IAMZDjHuHQ+a72jD+mVPKqgFM
KdiRUzI3GEeFUW9Mi5ru8SAoM8FDFLOuu7hjuYZpdTYWJfTxjS1aCQjcmv2WX87O
0jkaftgdPEEgFA03vki7/y7fc8St9lzwGx10h0lt9kOKlaRqsi0oegJkY9H1E41t
TTjg6pRN1C9fSIUgRAzMEqwJUHZhJMKlFSqp3Q8GuluLvWlLOOSo+m1T1XxM5My1
amUoOuzudskrogQgDIOmju66wicEFg6D1gyIBarZ3SDMBBfaMRHVCpYZfljD1xuh
Hw+pHcP1nVXvoDJ+69x/4NYfvNGuQPJWs6iSt2YTIMdFSUQlSueskHZle2O/lMQ=
=FcQh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----