[WDDM] Bernard Clayson's responce - Richard - Eric

["Bruce Eggum" <bruce.eggum(at)gmail.com>]

Dear Bernard and WDDM,

From Bernard's post it seems we have not defined the WDDM problems to solve nor intent of resolution.

Bernard states:

Bruce,
The first WDDM fell by the wayside because of organisation/rules/etc, do you
want this one to follow the same path.
How can anyone educate people about democracy when;
a) no one knows how it could work, and that would likely to vary according
to the people and location
b) no one is looking at the negative aspects.
c) no one has any practical experience, AND
d) WDDM itself excludes the great unwashed who it says should have the power
of veto over government decisions.
e) it lacks the confidence of it's declared convictions i.e. power to the
people.
 

Regarding "old wddm". I posted this in Nov 2005 http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/Wiki/EggumonWddm

George Sagi comments: Bruce:
You have a number of very good points. Please click on my name hidden at the bottom of the main page of WDDM, you will see many proposals that never been put out for discussions changes and for subsequent votes...

GeSagi

http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/archive/proposals0/gs_call_for_wddm_renewal.html
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/archive/proposals0/gs_action_plan.html

Please read Sagi's comments which suggest a " Central Coordinating Committee, CCC," It is this "committee" or board, which the "administrators" are forming to develop WDDM into the Org it was intended. This committee is being made up of all WDDM members who agree to be "active" and attend to these important matters. There are those who have other committments and we all understand that. However we need members on a "committee" who will dedicate themselves to this work.

The point is that proposals were never even considered. This was because the old WDDM could not or would not develop the structure necessary to run itself. It could not even process proposals. There were no approved; formal discussion, no committee to make recommendations and do research, and no method to determine members choices.  (vote)

Bernards comments "The first WDDM fell by the wayside because of organisation/rules/etc, do you want this one to follow the same path?"

Bernard sends the message intending that organization/rules/etc are bad for WDDM.

This is a huge mistake, because the old WDDM was NOT structured, had NO RULES and THAT is why it collapsed. Indeed when WDDM tried to adopt structure, this was the type of message used to stop any structure from being implemented or even considered. A Charter or Constitution was required in 2000 to become an Organization. WDDM never even accomplished writing one.

CICDD is a discussion group and a very important part of DD communication and growth. CICDD existed before WDDM was formed, and WDDM was formed by members of CICDD. Their intent was certainly not to make a second discussion group.

No, their intent was to have an organization with a Website which provided information and resources to educate people the world over about the advantages of DD, such as the Swiss have in their government. It was never the intent of WDDM to construct dd for any nation or community. It was never the intent of WDDM to make any policy or structure for any thing other than running itself.

Individual members are encouraged to develop DD / I&R in their own nations, communities. This is the members responsibility and WDDM has nothing to do with whatever that member does. The member is doing this on their own. Of course WDDM encourages this work, will support the members initiative in thought, but WDDM takes no responsibility in the actions of this members independent initiative.

WDDM has failed to accomplish its goals. The "new" WDDM has the potential to accomplish what the founders began in 2000. However, if the new WDDM is not allowed to build a structured organization with rules of order, a constitution or charter declaring what WDDM is, than it too will collapse.

An Organization is like a business. It has revenue and expense; it has goals which are the product of the organization. The people, through their government(s) have ruled that organizations may have to pay tax. The government is the one that determines this from the legally required structure of all organizations. Organizations have to follow certain laws to exist, and law requires this of WDDM. Organizations are held accountable, auditable and responsible for their actions.

The work to develop this structure takes research and time to accomplish. We find many members do not have the time to do this work. To develop this, a group of WDDM members have committed themselves to develop the necessary structure for WDDM.

Recently WDDM members were asked if they would approve a board, or committee, to accomplish this for WDDM. This was the intent in the "election" which just happened.

Rest assured that all "rules" and "structure" will be approved by members. This was not made clear before the election. Apparently we did not provide the necessary information for the members of WDDM to understand what is needed or being done.

I would like to ask you all to consider and suggest how WDDM can comply with the laws required of Organization.

Please join the Administrators group if you have the time.

Bernard goes on with his questions:

Bruce: It gets hazy because I do not know if Bernard is talking about WDDM or DD.

a) no one knows how it could work, and that would likely to vary according
to the people and location

Bruce: Swiss DD works very nicely, and many examples are available as people implement DD. It is information about these resources WDDN is providing for people.

b) no one is looking at the negative aspects.

Bruce: Everyone is looking at the negative aspects. Defining them and correcting them is the process of DD and is done in each country, community as they appear. DD is designed to correct negative aspects.

c) no one has any practical experience, AND

Bruce: The Swiss have much practical experience.

d) WDDM itself excludes the great unwashed who it says should have the power
of veto over government decisions.

Bruce: Not sure what this means, however WDDM provides information to all who desire it. WDDM hopes people will develop DD so they can have veto power in their governments.

e) it lacks the confidence of it's declared convictions i.e. power to the
people.

Bruce: WDDM has the conviction that it can provide useful information regarding DD for the people.

Apparently Bernard, you expect WDDM to do something it never intended. WDDM's goal is to provide information about the "direct" part of Swiss democracy, explaining the process of Initiative and Referendum. WDDM wants people to understand how DD could help them if they implemented some form of DD in their governments. WDDM provides space for people to ask questions and solicit information about how they can develop I&R in their own governments.

Do you want to stop WDDM from doing this? Do you want WDDM to continue to be in violation of the law? Do you want to shut down the website and become a discussion group?
 

Regards, Bruce

--
Bruce Eggum, Gresham Wisconsin, USA
www.doinggovernment.com/
Check out my Blog too
www.doinggovernment.blogspot.com/