| From: | wddm(at)mkolar.org |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, 29 Mar 2008 06:52:24 -0400 |
| Subject: | Re: [WDDM] UK: [Fwd: Definition of direct democracy by the people (revised)] |
Quoting Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it>:
> Mirek,
>
> This very interesting post makes me suggest that, instead of struggling
> for the best DD definition -- which struggle leads DD to nowhere but
> insults, as we WDDM inhabitants are experiencing quite enough every
> day -- it would be far more constructive if we defined DD for *what it
> is *not** (see: "2. The following procedures" in the msg quoted
below)
> instead of for *what it *is*.*
Perhaps.
Maybe we all forgot, that this discussion was started because we found that everybody here talks about DD, but different people often mean something quite different by this term, which naturally led to misunderstandings. The intention was to find out with what definition most of the WDDM members would be comfortable, then to put the definition somewhere on our web in the hope that people will in the future refer to the same thing when they use this term.
See
more in my recent 3 replies to:
http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/forum/read.php?23,810,899#msg-899
Mirek