Re: [WDDM] Toward a WDDM Charter

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

This is simply structure for the present 47 menbers to talk and make decisions regarding this organization, and ONLY this organization.

Since no world shaking decisions are being made, a simple majority 50+1 is quite adequate. Incorporation of DD is the process whereby Initiative can be accompolished by any member. After we reach 200 members an initiative would take one other sponsor. (1%) Further procedures for adoption will be in the charter.

I choose 1C, 2B, 3B, 4A, 5 2B, 6B, 7B

On 1/17/07, Albano Cordeiro wrote:

My options are : 1B, 2A, 3B, 4A, 6A, 7A, 8A
Albano Cordeiro



Mark Antell, editor CitizenPowerMagazine.net a écrit :
> *Toward a WDDM Charter*
>
> To: WDDM Membership
> From: Mark Antell, editor CitizenPowerMagazine.net
>
> /May I request that reviewers read this note completely before
> responding? Thank you./
>
> About three months ago I volunteered to help out with a WDDM charter
> because I think (as do we all) that direct democracy would lead to
> better governance; and that an organization of activists might help
> define and implement improved democracy.
>
> On conversation with several WDDM members it became clear that a
> number of issues need to be discussed and resolved before a draft
> charter can be drafted. So ... you will find below a series of eight
> critical issues entitled "Decisions underlying a charter for WDDM."
> The "Decisions" document also includes positions that might be chosen
> on these issues. These issues and positions have been circulated
> before to a limited group.
>
> I'm now requesting that members of WDDM comment on the questions and
> options on a point-by- point basis. While standardized responses will
> not be required, I would hope that people would generally indicate
> point-by-point whether they support option A, or option B, or
> something else entirely.
>
> Following the "Decisions" review and response (let's say 4 weeks, ie
> by Feb 4, 2007), co-sponsors (volunteers welcome) would join in
> drafting a proposed charter based on feedback. /The "Decisions"
> document is exploratory and therefore includes options. The charter
> proposal by contrast would not include options./ The process for
> review, discussion, modification, and approval of the proposed charter
> is partly dependant on what the proposed charter says. Under the
> process set by option 6A, the proposed charter would require a
> 'second' from 10% of the active membership to be posted for vote.
> Under any scenario, charter adoption must include a deliberative
> process ending with a vote.
>
> /Those wishing to take a leadership position in this process will be
> expected to motivate other discussion participants.
> /
> Best,
> Mark Antell
>
> /Let me note a personal bias for option A on all of the questions
> below. I think that an organization chartered per options A would be
> an exemplar of direct democracy.
>
> /------------------------
>
> *Decisions underlying a charter for WDDM*
> Positions on the issues below largely define what should be included
> in a proposed charter for WDDM.

--
Bruce Eggum
Gresham Wisconsin, USA
Urge to Surge
http://tinyurl.com/yndynn
http://www.doinggovernment.com/
Check out my Blog too
http://bruceeggum.blogster.com/