Re: [WDDM] Re: deliberation about the WDDM mission

[Doug Everingham <dnevrghm(at)powerup.com.au>]

Mirek & all,

I like all of these suggestions. Thanks.
--Doug Evergham
==
From: "M. Kolar" <wddm(at)mkolar.org>
Date: Sat Apr 21, 2007  7:12:33  PM Australia/Brisbane
To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
Subject: Re: [WDDM] Re: deliberation about the WDDM mission
Reply-To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net

I have added "and nested networks" to 1.5 of the improved version of
the Mission (http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/mission.php).
I think that this paragraph of the Mission is a good representation of
the DDD synthesis, isn't it?

In the light of the recent controversy about the use of the word
"believe" in WDDM Mission (the requirements for new members) when it
was interpreted as some sort of religious-like belief, I also suggest
to replace the word "believe" in the Mission by something more
appropriate that would not be prone to such interpretation. Something
suggesting that we have arrived to the conviction that DD is the best
system by rational analysis of the other systems, and that we seek
like-minded people to join us. We had in the original wording of the
Mission (posted here:
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/archive/original_wddm/
OriginalFoundingDoc.html) the verb "WE BELIEVE" in four places
(Preamble, 1., 1.8 and 1.9). In the working version above I've already
suggested replacements such as "we are convinced", " we are dedicated",
"we advocate".
Could you please review this and further refine.

I assume the new Board will eventually submit the wording of the
Mission for confirmation to all. I hope it's OK in the meantime to
update the Mission on the site as we slowly reach some consensus.

Mirek


Doug Everingham wrote:

> I favor adoption of the mission statement as amended by Mirek's
> suggestions below.
>
> If the full document is to be submitted for confirmation to all
> members of this group
> I would also appreciate a vote on including after "planning cells"
> words like "and nested networks".
> This refers to structures like those of Quakers, the Sociocratisch
> Centrum www.sociocracy.biz
> and many outlined by the International Institute for Self-governance
> -- http://members.optusnet.com.au/~sturnbull/
> (e.g. the Mondragón Cooperative Corporation),
> I include "nested" as referring to liaison arrangements between
> planning cells (of relevant stakeholders) at adjoining levels of
> action/deliberation as well as between related interest/activity
> groups.)
> -- Doug Everingham
> ===>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
> The truth is that we are without approved mission, so maybe we should
> really start deliberation on the better wording of the mission (and
> not wait for the new board). So here is my suggestion how to change
> those contradictory sections identified by Dough below:
>
> *1.2   The power to formulate laws and policies must be vested
> directly in the People at all levels of societal life.
>
> *1.5 and 1.7 are actually very closely related - they refer to various
> tools/procedures of DD, so I  propose to  merge them into a new
> paragraph 1.5 that would read like this:
>
> *1.5   We advocate and will work toward the creation of a whole
> spectrum of tools that will facilitate the direct participation of
> every person in public affairs and governance, such as (but not
> limited to) peoples initiatives, referenda, recalls, planning cells,
> citizens juries, citizens forums, wisdom councils, electronic voting.
>
> *The old 1.8 would become 1.7, etc. - see
> _http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/mission.php_ (as the old mission
> that was there was outvoted anyway, I  have just took the liberty to
> update it with the above tentative version; will of course update it
> further as need be).
>
> Mirek
>
>
> Doug Everingham wrote  on 13/04/2007 :
>
> Hi Mark and all,
>
> Thanks for progress so far.
>
> For some reason the frst 10 lines of our message (all but the approved
> Charter section)
> came to e with no limitation of line length -- the longest sentences
> took over 4 computer screen widths to read, but once copied (as below)
> it conformed to the exposed text width.
>
> I'd appreciate (and perhaps others would too) a chance to deliberate
> on and recast the outvoted mission statement draft.
>
> -- Doug Everingham
> ==>
>
>
> Doug Everingham wrote  on 18/03/2007 :
>
> Dear Mark,
>
> I refrain from voting for the draft charter because it includes at a
> page accessed via
> _www.world-wide-democracy.net
> _a mission statement which includes apparently contradictor sections:
>
>
> 1.2 The power to formulate laws and policies must be vested directly
> in the People _without representatives_ at all levels of societal >
> life.
>
> and
> 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.
> and
> 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_.
>
> -- Doug Everingham
> ======>
>
> ........