Re: [WDDM] Re: WDDM Membership Requirement

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

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 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/