Re: Systems of Voting: there is a bug there? (I/II)

[Antonio Rossin <rossin(at)tin.it>]

At 18:38 -0600 10-12-2005, Bruce Eggum wrote:

> No Antonio, it is the consensus of
> WDDM.
> WDDM email list is for administration purposes only.
> Agreed by WDDM members.
>
> I also do not send mail to you personally. I hit reply all.
> You likely hit reply instead of reply all so you sent
> personal
> email to me. It happens.
>
> Bruce,

All of this sounds strange to me. For these reasons:

I think the topic "Systems of Voting: there is a bug there?

(I/II)"  is quite appropriate to the administrative necessities

of WDDM, since -- let's suppose -- WDDM will formalize its

positions by voting.

Therefore I 've started the topic with a premise of general

order (I/II) to be continued with a proposal of more local

order (II/II - still in the offings).

Now you charge me with "off-topic", without knowing the

whole matter.  I protest, this position of yours sounds cheap

arrogance, rather than sincere wish to advance WDDM.

Anyway,  let's see what are your "WDDM-agreed"

counter-arguments:

quote

-------------------------------------------------

M. Kolar

to wddm
 More options
Nov 30


I also completely agree with Chris.
I suggest that you do not forward the copies of this kind of abstract
discussions to the WDDM mailing list, it would be nice if you could
keep them in the  more appropriate fora.  I also hoped we will
concentrate here on those PRACTICAL STEPS as Chris suggests,
on how to make this site and the WDDM somehow useful for the
efforts to improve  democracy.
Mirek

chris redmond wrote:

> you say feedback welcome.  can i suggest that the wddm concentrate
> it's efforts and communications on specific practical steps re direct
> democratic administration, and leave this kind of rubbish for those
> who are also comfortable with equally irrelevant and inappropriate
> forms of government.
> cheers,
> chris

-------------------------------------------------------

endquote

Please notice, I also agree with the overall recommendation for

us to concentrate on PRACTICAL STEPS.  Provided only the

practical steps to concentrate on have been exposed-proposed.

What hare the concrete, practical steps (policies) to concentrate

on? Please come up with each of them, and a clear reason for

which you suggest any preliminary discussion on each of them

should be expelled from WDDM.

As for myself, I suggest that the Voting System (I/II) is quite

a specific topic for WDDM -- once II/II is completed.

quote

    ---------------------------------------------------------

<WDDM webmaster> to Giorgio, wddm

 More options
  Jul 19


Dear Girgio!
   The WDDM mailing list was not supposed to be another
discussion forum. Just a tool for various "administrative",
member-related, organizational announcements. Nothing
that you submit to it will automatically appear on the
WDDM pages (Wiki). However, nothing is lost, everything
is stored, one can retrieve all old submissions by sending
(empty) e-mail messages to addresses as described in the
WDDM mailing list help
(http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/maillisthelp.html).
  (In due time, I will put manually the most important old
submissions on the Wiki pages, but everything can do that.)
  If you want something to appear on the WDDM pages,
you have to log into the Wiki, and edit old pages, or create
the new ones. It is really very simple.
Please read all the help pages linked to the WDDM Wiki
main page
(http://www.world-wide-democracy.net/Wiki/GettingStarted).
  I apologize for slow responses, you have to bear with
me over the summer, I have been working very hard on
another interesting web site for most of the past month
(finally practically finished), and I also want to spend some
time outdoors.
  Mirek

-----------------------------------------

endquote

??? what does this implies, for your adjudging me "off-topic"

purposes? 

Anyway, let's go along with your obsessive attaching me:

quote

-----------------------------------------------------------------

> On 12/10/05,Antonio Rossin wrote:
> > At 13:45 -0600 10-12-2005, Bruce Eggum wrote:
> > >Dear Antonio
> > >
> > >You said: (ant)
> > >Thanks, Leopoldo. You gave me a concise report of what the
> > >existing "System of Voting" are.  But this goes a
> > bit off-topic.
> > >The topic was, in my intention, opening a discussion
> > about the
> > >why and the how the current voting system -- whichever it
> > >may be -- could, or should, be changed.
> > >
> > >Obviousley this discussion does NOT belong on WDDM list.
> > >Please feel free to post it on CICDD if you choose to
> > continue.
> > >Bruce
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruce,
> >
> >
> > Obviously, the above is your personal opinion
> > only,
> > not that of the list. At least, it is not mine. 
> > Well then?
> >
> >
> > Therefore, feel free not to reply to posts which
> > you
> > consider off-topic, if you like, and most of all,
> > stop
> > please addressing me personally.
> >
> >
> > Rather, if you wanted to keep on with the
> > discussion
> > about an quite administrative topic that belongs to
> > the
> > WDDM list, please do honestly reply to the post
> > below
> >
> > (which I attach for your commodity.)
> > -------------------------------- fwd
> > ------------------------------
> > > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 09:01:36 +0100
> > > To: wddm@world-wide-democracy.net
> > > From: Antonio Rossin
> >
> > > Subject: Towards un-muddling WDDM's waters
> > > Cc: cicdd(at)yahoogroups.com,
> > > M. Kolar
> > >
> > > Dear Mirek, and democrat colleaguess
> > >
> > > as you know, the world-wide-democracy.net
> > > domain
> > > is about one year old, which means its yearly Internet
> > > registration should expire these days.  Let me take the
> > > occasion for a brief report of the administration history
> > > of WDDM.
> > >
> > > WDDM has born at the Athens' 2.nd CICDD meeting,
> > > thanks to George Sagi's U.S.# 100 for its international
> > > registration. (G.S. also drafted the WDDM Founding
> > > Documents on behalf of its members)
> > >
> > > After that, the WDDM registration was up for three
> > > years over thanks to its web master Pino Strano (who
> > > but beard the registering expense and the secretariat
> > > task for pure power-seeking purposes).
> > >
> > > To date, the WDDM structure -- for what it is -- is
> > > up thanks to you Mirek, and your terrific effort as the
> > > WDDM web master and "admin".
> > >
> > >
> > > Well now:
> > > no problem for the WDDM domain registration fees,
> > > thanks to antonio (myself) who made a donation for
> > > that fee. No problem also for covering the registration
> > > fee of the next year 2006, because my donation has
> > > been calculated to cover a two years registration fee.
> > >
> > > (Clearly, I'm speaking of  the financial administration
> > > only. All of us have to thank each other for supporting
> > > WDDM with the mostly valuable contribution of our
> > > sincere DD ideas, and the spent time).
> > >
> > > But the problem is now, I won't made any further
> > > donation for the expiring of WDDM domain on 2007.
> > > Therefore, Mirek and members, we have one year for
> > > deciding how to keep on with the WDDM domain and
> > > its organization and administration mastering alive.
> > >
> > > As for my humble opinion, it is just us WDDM members
> > > who have to contribute with a membership fee for every
> > > WDDM vital necessity, so to keep it on being our own
> > > sovereign democratic property. I'm not in favour of
> > > individual donations, or, far worse, for funding offered
> > > by the corporate companies (as once Jiri Polak and
> > > Mike Gravel tried to do).  Anyway:
> > >
> > > Let's hope us WDDM members will land finally and
> > > take into account the pragmatic necessities of real
> > > Democracy. Let me recommend this to:
> > >
> > > - the innocent democrat, who thinks of Democracy it
> > > is built as soon as a sound DD Constitution is built.
> > > He seems to ignore that in order to build a sound DD
> > > Constitution the DD (Constitution) builders shall be
> > > built prior, and the DD users shall be built as well.
> > >
> > > - the axiomatic scientist, who took our DD discussion
> > > rooms as his own pit, to spam to, aiming to self-promote
> > > his elitist dogmas.
> > >
> > > - the administration power-seeker, who urges us to
> > > turn our World Wide Democracy into a monopoly of
> > > bureaucracy.
> > >
> > > See original quotes below.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > antonio
> > >
> > > -------------------- original quotes --------------------
> > >
> > > At 14:38 -0500 6-12-2005, John Baker wrote:
> > > > Yes but..
> > > >
> > > > I thought this was a DD advocacy forum. Discussing
> > > > NMT as a prerequisite for DD seems off-topic to me.
> > > > Personally,  I believe the majority can be trusted more
> > > > than a minority. This means I am more afraid of anything
> >
> > > > less than a democractic decision.
> > > >
> > > > I do not know what the best decision is for the whole,
> > > > therefore I ask each individual for their honest opinion.
> > > > The only way to do that is via a democratic vote.
> > > > Therefore, I support DD, unequivacably. I ave no doubt
> > > > that DD is better for everyone as a whole for this reason
> > > > and therefore I am not concerned about NMT.
> > > >
> > > > Once a global DD constitution is established I believe
> > > > NMT will take care of itself.
> > > >
> > > > Respectfully,
> > > > JB
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > At 20:34 +0100 7-12-2005, Georges Metanomski wrote:
> > > >  > John Baker wrote:
> >
> > > > >  >
> >
> > > >  > > After glancing at Georges site, it seems
> > > > to me to be
> > > >  > > a play for recognition. Notice how every page of
> > > > the
> > > >  > > site is prefaced by his name.
> > > > =======================================
> > > > It's not my site, but that of an English scientist and
> > > > philosopher Evans who for some reason, rightly or wrongly,
> > > > esteems me and my writings and asked me for permission
> > > > to collect them in a part of his "Academy" devoted to me
> > > > and edited by him the way he judged best.
> > > > Georges.
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > At 15:01 -0600 6-12-2005, Bruce Eggum wrote:
> > > > Dear John and Others
> >
> > > > Antonio has again muddied the waters so
> > > > discussion
> > > > gets sidetracked and people leave the lists and
> > > > resign.
> > > >
> > > > I see he has again copied to WDDM which is an
> > > > administrative list. I will send there with this
> > > > reply
> > > > but it is not for this type discussion.  The
> > > > CICDD
> > > > list is open so unless members police
> > > > themselves
> > > > about ethics, Antonio can rave on in that list.
> > > >
> > > > We do not need Antonio "acronym's" with his
> > > > own
> > > > perverse meanings which are not universally
> > > > known.
> > > > People have enough problem with language without
> > > > adding new unknowns.
> > >
> > >
> > > (remaining Bruce's deleted)

------------------------------------------

endquote

Please notice: the quoted above 8 Dec 2005 contribution of

mine, with subject : "Towards un-muddling WDDM's waters",

appears to be just one of  the PRACTICAL STEPS (perhaps

the more basic one, if not the only one) that Richard suggested

us to concentrate on.

I question: why don't you concentrate on that?  Instead of

obsessively concentrate yourself on attaching me?

(of course, I know very well the answer to this question.

It may but happen that it is YOU who does not know the why

of your doing so)

A last question.

What is your position re the WDDM overall purpose, according

with your spam below?  It seems that you are using WDDM as

an potential audience room for your DDL and TRG advertising,

that is, a tool for blowing up your personal domain, and not the

reverse.

Regards,

antonio

> --
> Direct Democracy League, DDL is a nonpartisan coalition, advocating
> constitutional renewal at state and national levels to give us TRG --
> true republican governance. Not mob-rule, it is a balanced governance
> of I&R's citizen lawmaking combined with representative govt. TRG
> relies on the People to make decisions using  State-level
> OCI's (online citizen institutions). OCI's will be transparent
> organizing institutions, not control devices.TRG  has been
> legally recognized as a republican form of government intrinsic to the
> Constitution.
> http://trg-polity.org
>
> Bruce Eggum, Gresham Wisconsin, USA
> http://doinggovernment.com/
> Check out my Blog too
> http://doinggovernment.blogspot.com/