Re: [WDDM] Re: WDDM Membership Requirement

[common1(at)voicesfordd.com]

Hi All,

I, personally, agree with all of what Bruce is recommending EXCEPT the
statement excluding people with criminal records. Here, in the United
States, there are more people behind bars who are not "criminals" but
merely people who have been unlucky enough to have a non-white skin, or to
have used a harmless drug that, for one reason or another, was not
acceptable to the Establishment. Furthermore there are untold numbers of
Americans who have paid their debts to society--and they should not be
excluded simply because the Establishment has labeled them "criminals".

Lee G.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dear WDDM Members,
>
> I joined WDDM a year or so after it's founding. I was invited by another
> member, that is how it was done. I was given a copy of the FD and asked to
> study it. I signed a statement that I agreed with the FD and membership
> criteria. I was accepted by referendum two weeks later. As a WDDM Member I
> am responsible to follow the WDDM membership clause, which states to
> follow
> the WDDM FD.
>
> This WDDM FD has never been changed or thrown out. It has been neglected
> and
> overlooked.
>
> I suggest WDDM take up the original WDDM Founding Documents as
> established.
> Than, make any appropriate changes following the process provided which is
> Initiative and Referendum.
>
> We can do this now that we have a voting method. If you vote using the new
> method, that is endorsement of that method. If you disagree with the
> voting
> method, please immediately say so before the referendum.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I WDDM member Bruce Eggum submit the following three Proposals:
>
> 1. MEMBERSHIP I here by PROPOSE that the WDDM MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA be as
> follows:
> " 3.1 Any individual, with sound mind and without a criminal record, can
> join our Movement by accepting our Founding Documents, Mission Statement,
> and the Membership Rules and Conduct."
>
> 2. WDDM FD I here by PROPOSE that the original WDDM FOUNDING DOCUMENTS be
> immediately adopted for the present WDDM and that any appropriate changes
> can be made with the rules within the FD.
>
> 3. I propose that consideration and discussion of this be done for a
> period
> of Four weeks, after which a Referendum will be held to accept or reject
> my
> proposals #1 Membership and #2. WDDM FD
> Bruce Eggum
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> FOUNDING DOCUMENTS
> WORLDWIDE DIRECT DEMOCRACY MOVEMENT, WDDM
>
> PREAMBLE
> We, members of the Continuing International Congress on Direct Democracy
> (CICDD) decided during our second Congress in Delphi, Greece, the
> birthplace
> of democracy, to establish a formal Worldwide Direct Democracy Movement.
> We
> dedicate ourselves to work toward the introduction of Direct Democracy
> (DD)
> into the representative systems, through Citizens Initiatives and
> Referendums, and, ultimately, transform them peacefully to true
> democracies
> of the people. We pledge ourselves to remain faithful to genuine
> democratic
> principles as expressed in our Mission Statement. We aim to inspire others
> to join us and help to develop principles and methods leading to direct
> democracy (DD) of the people. We have been and will remain dedicated
> members
> of CICDD and share our ideals and proposals with all participants in the
> Network, individuals, and families.
>
>
> MISSION STATEMENT
>
> We, members of the Worldwide Direct Democracy Movement, believe that all
> citizens have the right to directly perform lawmaking and other
> governmental
> functions in any polity in which they live. Therefore we seek to develop
> and
> promote any participatory processes which allow people to exercise their
> rights to make their own laws and/or manage their own governance.
>
> 1. WE BELIEVE IN THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES
>
> 1.1 People are sovereign, and they are the only legitimate authority to
> govern their society.
>
> 1.2 The power to formulate laws and policies must be vested directly in
> the
> People without representatives at all levels of societal life.
>
> 1.3 Every person have equal right and opportunity to participate in public
> affairs.
>
> 1.4 The people shall define major societal issues and policy alternatives
> when they are based on well-informed choices.
>
>     1.4.1 Public opinion can be easily influenced by vested interests and
> money. Therefore, we oppose such manipulations. Public debates must be
> factual, balanced, impersonal and non-manipulative.
>
>     1.4.2 Each issue must be presented and considered independently and
> its
> best alternative be selected strictly on its own merit.
>
> 1.5 Peoples Initiatives, backed by sufficient number of signatures, should
> mandate a binding Referendum and/or recall of unworthy representatives
> (I&R+R) decided by public vote.
>
> 1.6 Individuals and families must be made acquainted, from 'bottom up',
> with
> sensible educational tools to understand social morality, the common needs
> and interests of all, thereby, enable them to make knowledge-based
> societal
> policies.
>
> 1.7 We as 'Facilitators' shall endeavor to help citizens to setup Planning
> Cells, Citizen Juries, and Citizens Forums, as local bodies to supervise
> municipal and local administrations and public administrations. These
> 'Forums' will hear and attempt to settle issues, and if they cannot, then
> refer them either to the courts or to Citizens Parliaments.
>
> 1.8 We believe in and advocate peaceful and gradual transformation of
> society into genuine democracy.
>
> 1.9 We are against any form of aggression and violence, but we believe
> that
> the people must defend themselves, if and when, they are attacked.
>
> 1.10 We advocate respectful dialogue and constructive proposals.
>
> 1.11 Voting and gathering signatures can take place by secure electronic
> methods, therefore, we endeavor to have them legally established.
>
> 1.12 The results of public decisions will constitute the body of the law.
>
>
> Signed by International Coordinating Committee for the formalization of
> the
> Worldwide Direct Democracy Movement.
>
> 3. MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA
>
> 3.1 Any individual, with sound mind and without a criminal record, can
> join
> our Movement by accepting our Founding Documents, Mission Statement, and
> the
> Membership Rules and Conduct.
>
> 3.2 Initially, there is no membership fee, however, in the future, the
> members may vote for a membership fee.
>
> 3.3 Each member shall be a subscriber of the 'Newsletter'. A minimum US
> $20.00 donation is recommended for its upkeep.
>
> 3.4 An application for membership shall be posted by the Secretary for 2
> weeks for discussion. If none of the members oppose the application for
> membership, then the applicant shall be automatically adopted to be a
> member
> of WDDM.
>
> 3.5 When opposed during the two week discussion period, the Secretary
> shall
> 'post' the membership for voting for another 2-weeks. At the end of the
> voting period, the Secretary shall calculate and post the results.
>
> 3.6 If the majority decides that a Member violated our principles,
> contained
> in these 'Founding Documents', such person shall be expelled from our
> movement, and also, suffer legal consequences.
>
>
>
> http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/archive/original_wddm/OriginalFoundingDoc.html
>
>
>
>
> On 2/26/07, Bruce Eggum <bruce.eggum(at)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear all,
> > There have been "discussions" but not necessarily "decisions". Indeed,
> > we
> > had no established way to "vote". Mirek, Thank you for setting up a
> > voting
> > process. Please submit the process of voting in writing so any person
> > who
> > accepted the "election" position would know how to do it. Where votes
> > are
> > sent and how to access them etc.
> >
> > The present "Mission Statement" appeared, but I did not discuss it
> > because
> > there were other matters, like who was a member.
> >
> > I think this statement would piss off a lot of business people,
> > entrepreneurs, and others.
> >
> > "EVERYWHERE, the people of planet Earth are angry, frustrated, and
> > disappointed with their political systems, for dictators are still
> > tyrants,
> > and so-called democracies are undeniably and clearly undemocratic.
> > Politics
> > still favors the powerful, and political parties are not only filled
> > with
> > incompetent opportunists, but in this highly technological world they
> > are
> > obsolete."
> >
> > Bruce: We are trying to establish DD with government. To call these
> > people
> > we are trying to establish communication with: "forked-tongued
> > politicians, greedy, uncaring businessmen," really screws that up.
> >
> > On WDDM Website:  Earth, people are weary of forked-tongued politicians,
> > greedy, uncaring businessmen, and the continuous wars they initiate.
> > Everywhere, people seek new ways to govern their societies; ways that
> > would
> > be more honest and just, promising a better and safer future for
> > themselves
> > and their children. They seek ― and they are finding ― new ways that do
> > promise a better and safer future. Among these pioneers, the
> > overwhelming
> > consensus is that, of all these new ways, "Participatory" Democracy,
> > also
> > known as "Direct" Democracy, is the most promising path to that better
> > future.
> >
> > So, we best establish an AIM of what we are doing here.
> > I completely oppose the present "mission statement".
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > On 2/26/07, M. Kolar <wddm(at)mkolar.org> wrote:
> > > Dear all!
> > >
> > > I remind you that I wrote on Feb. 2:
> > > > Here we could at first at least try to finalize some basic things
> > that
> > > are
> > > > long overdue, that determine how WDDM is viewed from the outside
> > > world, one
> > > > issue at a time (for example, one simple question each week or two -
> > > would
> > > > that be a reasonable time scale?).
> > > >
> > > > We can start with the character of the WDDM (I do not mean now
> > whether
> > > it
> > > > should be an organization or association or whatever; let's accept
> > for
> > > now
> > > > that it is just a group of supposedly DD advocates without any fixed
> > > > structure). The question is: should we be a model of society at
> > large
> > > (a
> > > > future DD society), and accept as members anybody who has some
> > > interest in
> > > > how the society is organized and governs itself, or should we be a
> > > group of
> > > > people who share a rather well defined set of ideas about what
> > > democracy is,
> > > > and concentrate on promoting this vision.
> >
> >
> > WDDM  has no right  to  tell anyone what to do. WDDM is to provide
> > information,  advocacy for  ALL DD methods. WDDM is not a government, it
> > cannot be a DD example. WDDM can put this information on the website and
> > links for people to refer to. WDDM can provide communication methods,
> > where
> > people can ask questions etc. but WDDM cannot be responsible for an
> > individuals views nor endorses them.
> >
> > > > So for the next while I'll be excepting here only contributions
> > > concerning
> > > > this questions probably until we reach a reasonable consensus.
> > >
> > > Then later I asked specifically about new member requirements.
> > > The only response to this request was this one:
> > >
> > > Mark Antell, editor CitizenPowerMagazine.net wrote:
> > > > Mirek,
> > > > Thanks for the reminder on the issue of minimum membership
> > > > requirements.  I agree that we should enforce the presently posted
> > > > requirement that new members must affirm postive interest in DD (or
> > at
> > > > least democracy improvement).    Mark Antell
> > > > ------------------
> > >
> > > I agree with Mark.
> > >
> > > Can we now close this matter?
> >
> >
> > Bruce- NO
> > We have people joining "automatically" with no review at all.
> > I suggest that people could "join" our OPEN email list, and than they
> > would be "email members" which is what the majority of Move On members
> > are.
> >
> > Than, to become a Voting WDDM Member, after six months on the Open list
> > they could petition to join and become a voting member. (this 6 months
> > could
> > be waived in individual cases) We would have "talked" to them on OPEN or
> > we
> > could now "talk to them" before they become members. Thus WDDM could
> > make
> > better choices of who is a member. Membership in any group has some
> > demands, they need to know what they are and we need to know if they
> > applicant fits our ways.
> >
> > As there were no objections, and also based on the past discussions, it
> > > seems
> > > that everybody agrees with the following:
> > > ------------------
> > > WDDM is a group of people who share the Mission Statement as
> > formulated
> > > at
> > > http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/ , and concentrate on promoting
> > this
> > > vision.
> > >
> > > WDDM membership can be obtained quite easily by registering on the
> > WDDM
> > > site as
> > > described at http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/join.php
> > > However, the new member must satisfy the following minimum
> > requirements:
> > > fill
> > > in correctly all the fields in the registration form. In particular,
> > > give one's
> > > real name and in the box named "Relation to Direct Democracy" write a
> > > few words
> > > about themselves (individual members) or a short description of the
> > > organization - any information that could be of interest to the DD
> > > community
> > > (and that is not yet in the "DD public domain").
> > >
> > > If the above information in not provided, the new members will be
> > > reminded to
> > > rectify this. If they fail to do so within another week after this
> > > reminder,
> > > their WDDM member account will be deleted.
> > > -----------------
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce NO see above for membership .
> >
> > Let us wait for another five days. If there are no more votes,
> > objections,
> > > or
> > > any other suggestions on this subject, made by e-mail to this list,
> > this
> > > statement will be considered a official WDDM document.
> > >
> > > Bruce, I hope this procedure is OK. It is exactly the e-mail voting
> > > system you
> > > suggested, I hope.
> > >
> > > Mark will be presenting the charter proposal shortly. It will actually
> > > incorporate the above statement in somewhat different words.
> > >
> > > Discussion and approval of the charter will be the next item to
> > discuss
> > > in a
> > > similar way as the above. Maybe we could approve the charter proposal
> > > item by item?
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce: WHAT Charter?
> >
> > This way we will hopefully adopt some official documents, and complete
> > > finally
> > > the Online Constituting Convention started on March 25, 2005
> > > (http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/archive/proposals0/wddm_index_march29_april8.html
> > > ).
> >
> >
> > Mirek
> >
> > > WDDM Mission Statement as formulated at
> > > http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/ is
> > > acceptable  NO IT IS NOT (Bruce)
> >
> > --
> > 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/
> >
> >
> >    vote
>
>
> --
> 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/


--
THE FUTURE WILL BE WHATEVER
CURRENT GENERATIONS WILL IT TO BE!
___________________________________
www.voicesfordd.com