Re: [WDDM] [cicdd] Re: [WDDM] NO more Resignations- Let's start again!!

["Bruce Eggum" <bruce.eggum(at)gmail.com>]

Dear Doug,
Apparently you like most of this group, never did venture into Forum to see what it was Mirek was doing. The Forum was up and all the tools for WDDM to communicate.

All that was asked, (months ago) was for the members to establish basic procedure so all members could contribute to all of WDDM. (equality) This discussion was to take place in FORUM. A few came and contributed their thoughts but most did not. We needed ways to determine what the members desired.

This may be as simple as who should be linked, what organizations we endorse etc.

Thus we wanted to develop a procedure for I&R for WDDM and ONLY WDDM INTERNALLY as it says in the founding documents. This way WDDM members could communicate their ideas etc. on the internet. Also an INTERNAL WDDM Coordinating Committee who would be active members, who could deal with issues as they 
developed.Some members have other obligations and do not have time to follow closely the immediate matters of WDDM. The Coordinating Committee would solve that problem. Indeed EVERYONE could be on the committee if they chose. (actively) But we tried that too.

Using Forum and the other tools, every member of WDDM could contribute their ideas, their suggestions and their gripes. Every member of WDDM could choose and "vote" in some manner to determine the consensus of the WDDM Group. 
What was and is needed is the process, the structure of how to utilize these tools.

As to "choosing" a board, we asked for everyone to come to Forum and participate,  which would have been the whole WDDM running WDDM. Nobody came. We than asked for volunteers, nobody came. Now we are following Georges suggestion to see if that pans out.

Well, I guess the real truth is nobody wants to participate in an organization. If all you want is to chat a bit, you can do that on CICDD. If that is your choice it is fine, go for it.

When the dust settles, we will democratically go on with WDDM, providing information on ALL DD methods as SUGGESTIONS for anyone to begin their own method of DD which fits their government. WDDM is a meeting place, has provisions for most languages so people can develop their own Nations DD. They can ask the group for suggestions, ideas, but they develop their own DD for their own Nation, and that Nation will obviously need to have their own referendum to decide if they want it. NOBODY can stuff DD or anything else onto another Nation.
[If you have that kind of power, email me immediately! There are some here in the USA who would like to discuss something with you}

Those WDDM Members who want to follow the founding documents of WDDM, please continue as members. Please use OPEN WDDM email list and also check out WDDM Forum and post there. There is much information already started and old discussions on some of these matters.

So, the ones un-subscribing were never active members with the exception of Antonio and Bernard who only wanted to stop the process, never providing their Initiative to solve the matter. They never seemed to understand that WDDM INTERNAL matters did not effect cicdd, the price of oil, or anything else let alone the world as Antonio kept insisting.

Of course it was nice of Antonio to contribute to a website, but he did not ask the group for any suggestions, he did not ask the group at all. He took over like a dictator and placed his way on WDDM. Did he consider how WDDM would pay the cost to continue the WEBSITE? I disagree with his take over methods, not his financial contribution.. It is ironic, after he made the site, he disagreed with all that had been put up there, and denounced any effort to make it usable.

Now, we are still trying to keep democracy in WDDM. The recent information into the Anarchist ways reveals many of them admit they need to be organized. A ball team organizes so they know where the game is. They don't all run here and there trying to play ball alone, or do it all themselves. They do it as a team.

Well, obviously there ain't a team spirit in wddm -----------------  If this exemplifies DD, than not much hope.
Bruce
ps I simply replied, The extra addys are from Doug and others. I do not know all who receive this but HI from Bruce
pps if you all joined WDDM, we could have on hell of a DD group.

On 2/4/07, Doug Everingham wrote:

Aspirants for democracy,

With Bernard and Antonio leaving, I see not much chance for me to stay
in the WDDM list.
I may be misunderstanding George, but it seems to me he is advocating
something almost the opposite of DD:
a rotating membership of a committee like the UN Security Council, with
a senior members' category having more voting power than the other
members.

        --      Doug Everingham
====




Dear George, and dear WDDM members

I agree with Bernard's position below, and therefore:
please accept my resignation from the current WDDM

Yes, George, WDDM has suffered, and is still suffering, from
a childhood illness: that of one's wish to rule over others.

Really, I've already done my "Let's try it!!" democratic duty.

Indeed, as you can know, I have been a member of WDDM-1.
What you can't know, it is that when WDDM has died, thanks
to the idiocy of some bureaucrats wanting to rule over direct
democracy, I and Mirek and George Sagi (WDDM-1 funder)
discussed about the opportunity to keep WDDM alive, with a
new WDDM domain (since Pino, the WDDM-1 secretariat
and web-master, gave up being the WDDM web-master but
he maintained the original WDDM domain property).

It happened two years ago. To keep on with a WDDM 2 being
up, a new WDDM domain had to be purchased. I and Mirek
agreed to set up a WDDM 2 with him as the web-master, and
I as the funder. So I made a donation for a two years WDDM
Internet account as my last contribution.

I made so because of reasons of consistency with the democratic
mission I subscribed as a WDDM-1 founding member. At start, I
but said to Mirek that I was happy to found WDDM-2, but I didn't
want to be a WDDM member any more, to avoid discussions with
the bureaucrats like those that infected WDDM-1.
Yet Mirek insisted to have me in the new WDDM-2 membership,
and I accepted.

All of this, to say that I've made my "let's try", all during these
WDDM-2 years of life. I'm sorry to admit, my trial has failed.
That is, after these two years, I see again the bureaucrats who
manage to set up rules over what should be Direct Democracy,
and yourself, George Kokkas, who suggest WDDM to install a
"Decision Committee" without having any democratic policy --
say, a policy coming from the territory bottom-up -- to... decide?


I think I've concluded my WDDM-2 trial. Direct Democracy
is not a matter of voting directly, IMHO . It is a matter of :

1. originating policies from the territory bottom-up; and
2. controlling directly those representatives who may have been
put in charge of implementing 1. policies (see Simpol).

All the remaining is Democracy without matter, a dream for
generals without army, or for aspirant DD drivers who put the
cart before the horse -- like the charter before the people.

In conclusion, I agree with Bernard, and subscribe:

I will be interested in returning, or joining a progressive group,
if there is any sign of willingness to TRY different approaches.

Meanwhile ........ you should make good progress with me out
of the way.


Be well,

antonio



At 6:48 +0200 30-01-2007, George L. Kokkas Law Office wrote:

Dear WDDM members,



we found finally a solution in the DD oriented structure modelsfor
the Greek DD Movement, by having in all our decisional committees a
majority of permanent and really active members and a minority of
all the other members (including the rest of the active), selected by
sortition and giving them all a chance to decision-making by
rotation, until the whole list of members finishes (for instance in a
proposed 11 members Coordination Committee of WDDM, we can appoint 6
or 7 members, as permanent for a period of one or two years and 5 or 4
members rotating among all the rest of members every six months in
the post of this main organ of WDDM - similarly with the Security
Council of United Nations, that has the ex super powers of the world as
permanent members and all the other countries, as Greece in this period
, as members of this decisional mean of the entire world).

This is my FINAL PROPOSAL for WDDM structure and decision making
procedures, even with simple e-mail systems, coming out of my
experience as a democrat lawyer and as almost the only active
Founding member of WDDM and an elected ex Vice Spokesperson of WDDM,
in order to avoid our childhood illnesses in the future!

Let's try it!!



George L. Kokkas

NGO "Forum for Citizens' Democracy"

----- AÉ¦ÉŒÉ«É»Þ ÉÐÉÀÉ“ÉÉø -----

(snip)




On 1/28/07, Bernard Clayson < bernard-clayson(at)shuartfarm.fsnet.co.uk>
wrote:

Please accept my resignation from wddm.

Reasons:

a) I am too busy locally to watch paint dry on this list, and it is a
non-contributary distraction
from my primary objective - to find out how democracy works with people.
12 years ago I started constructing New Political System, it had
numerous levels and a defined
structure.
Ditto with Lee's model and others.
About 5 years ago I constructed Phoenix, a multi-level structured email
system that was capable of
keeping everyone informed without involving those with other interests
on the other lists.
The most vocal objection (same name as a USA Vietnam war program) came
from someone who realises (at
last) that -
"I think a good idea to recognize that we each have different talents
and"

b) "to join together like people into nine groups to bring out their
specialty is a good idea.
Nine? at the current rate of progress, in 20 years time it will sink in
that nine is totally
inadequate for the job in hand, and it will be totally academic to most
of us anyway.

c) It would not be too wild a guess that these 'nine' groups would be
on the web i.e. we would have
to go looking to follow what is happening.
I live in the UK (which is rapidly heading to dictatorship), yet I get
regular summaries with links
to download the full detail .... if it interests me.
I can't be the only one with a slow connection, and if a dictatorial
government can keep me
informed, why can't wddm.

d) "we need an organisation" - even a one-man business operates in
different modes, an electrician
would not (if he wanted to live) connect to the mains whilst thinking
about his tax returns.
Ditto with companies, government and organisations, yet 6 years later,
wddm is still trying to
function on a single plane email system, and complains about confusion.

e) A founding member of wddm is rebuked (for making a suggestion) with -
"The topic is WDDM Charter, not various kinds of DD or government. If
you want to advocate for a
specific DD model or type, you can do so on WDDM Website using Forum
and WIKI"
The same dictatorial approach that caused me to resign the first wddm.

f) "we need a voting system" - in 25 years time, assuming a voting
system is introduced, you will
have voted yourselves in to a corner with the advocates saying "well we
voted on that".
Which is the situation that gave cause to my second public-run
referendum.

g)In 30 years time, it may occur to some that there are more
important aspects than voting.

If someone could please show me the exit, I would appreciate it.

I will be interested in returning, or joining a progressive group, if
there is any sign of
willingness to TRY different approaches.

Meanwhile ........ you should make good progress with me out of the way.

Adios amigos

Regards

Bernard

--
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/