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.
I. Principles.
1. Organizational Goals. We’d like to make a better world. One in
which all adults have equality under law, plus the four basic freedoms:
freedom of speech, freedom of religion (or more broadly, freedom of
conscience), freedom from want, and freedom from fear.
1A. WDDM is dedicated to the study, education, and implementation of
direct democracy, deliberation, and consensus at all levels of
governance from the local to the supra-national level. Direct
democracy means enhancement and broadening of initiative, referendum
and recall. It also means use of modern technology to improve
opportunities for deliberation and discourse.
OR
1B. WDDM is dedicated to the study, education, and implementation of
direct democracy at all levels of governance.
OR
1C. WDDM is dedicated to the study and education of direct democracy.
This option should allow tax-advantaged contribution (under US law) to
WDDM as an educational non-profit institution.
2. Organizational Methods - commitment to direct democracy
2A.WDDM will be an exemplar for direct democracy. As much as possible,
decision making power will flow from direct vote of the membership.
OR
2B. WDDM will strive to implement direct democracy in its own
operations. However, in the initial organizational phase WDDM will
assign considerable responsibility to an executive committee.
3. Organizational Methods - encouraging discourse
3A. WDDM shall continue to maintain a BBS or WIKI to which all members
may post proposals or opinions. Many electronic BBS systems are
afflicted with the same problem: they provide high visibility to the
fastest and most aggressive multiple posters. The executive board
shall, early on, propose methods to calm this problem, probably by
making it easy for each BBS user to locate input from voices that they
value*.
OR
3B. WDDM shall continue to maintain a BBS or WIKI to which all members
may post proposals or opinions.
4. Membership
4A. Membership is limited to those who agree that governance would be
improved by expansion and facilitation of direct democracy,
deliberation and consensus. Active members must also commit to review
proposals and vote on motions posted on the WDDM website.
OR
4B. As above, plus some language recognizing groups within WDDM.
II. Business Rules
5. Structure
Can we simply agree to start with the simplest possible structure:
Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary-Treasurer - elected for a one year
term by majority vote? Later, via the charter amendment process, we
could add additional structure including perhaps an Elections Officer,
Ombudsperson, standing committees, etc. etc. Executive board
communications, and other committee communications shall be open for
review by the membership.
6. Initiative. Initiative means a process which allows the membership
to raise an issue and to bring it to binding vote of the membership.
6A. Any member may post an initiative for discussion. Posting for
decision shall require several "seconds" from the membership." A two
step process for initiatives is established:
-A proposal is posted for discussion by one or more ‘sponsors.’ The
‘sponsors’ of the proposal will decide if they wish to modify the
proposal in response to discussion. If so, the proposal is modified
and reposted for discussion.
-If, after discussion and possible modification, 10% of the membership
agree to second a proposal, then it will be posted as a motion.
OR
6B. Any member may post an initiative, first for discussion, and then
as a motion for decision.
7. Approval of Motions via Initiative.
7A. Most organizations recognize a distinction between business
motions, versus motions which modify the charter. Business motions
are adopted by a simple majority vote. Charter modification motions
require a super-majority (of those voting) of 66%.
OR
7B. Business motions or charter modification motions are adopted via a
simple majority of those voting. (Author’s note: I don’t understand
how this option would work, but one commenter strongly requested it.
I’ll drop this option unless someone steps in to explain it.)
8. Referenda on Executive Board Decisions. Referendum is a process
whereby an action of the legislative body is brought to the membership
for validation or disapproval.
8A. The executive board is empowered to pass temporary business
motions; however executive board decisions will be immediately posted
for referendum vote. A simple majority of voting members is necessary
to approve executive board business motions. Decisions not approved
will cease to have any force. Charter changes may be proposed by the
executive committee but are approved through the normal charter
modification process.
OR
8B. Decisions of the executive board may be overridden by the standard
initiative process.
---------------------
* (From Item 3A above)
Possible suggestions for regulating aggressive multiple postings
include:
i) The BBS or WIKI shall support tools allowing each reader to
select voices that they wish to consult first.
ii) The BBS or WIKI shall provide a default, high priority
location for executive board review and recommendation on each
proposal.
iii) The WIKI shall automatically order postings, based perhaps
on a ‘poster score’ calculated from the average number of readers per
posting.
|