PNC 4/25/12

From United States Pirate Party
Jump to: navigation, search
Back to Pirate National Committee Back to PNC Minutes Back to United States


Pirate National Committee Meeting - April 25th 2012  


    ==Agenda:==

  • Call to Order 
  • Roll Call (Sign In - 5 Minutes)
    • State - Representative
      • Georgia
        • Jarod
    • New York
        • kusanagi
      • Oregon
        • MrSquared
      • Florida
        • Rush
      • Washington
        • QuazarGuy
    • Massachusetts
        • SplendidSpoon
    • Observers (Represented)
      • Brady (WA)
    • At-Large (Observers not represented)
      • Coyo (TX)
      • TravisMcCrea (ID)
      • Caleb Langeslag (MN)
  • Voting (1-State-1-Vote - See: http://us.pirate.is/archives/98 
    • (Chair)
      • Travis
      • Kusanagi
    • (Vice Chair)
      • Brady (Removed himself from consideration)
      • Erik
      • Travis (Removed himself from consideration)
      • Kusanagi
    • (Secretary)
      • Brady
      • Jeff
      • Jarod
  • Discussion Points (30 Minutes)
    • Purpose of Committee
      • State vs. individual representation
      • Why not copy the PPI's structure? (Pirate Parties America?)
    • Affiliates, such as the IT Committee, are not controlled at all by this organization
    • Naming
      • Can we even call ourselves the PNC?
      • Pirate Parties America PAC
      • Pirate Party PAC
      • United States Pirate Party
      • Pirate Party of the United States
      • Pirate Party //Only use the US when speaking nationally
    • Redirection & de-emphasis of national activity
      • Too much focus on platforms at the national level
      • Focus needs to be redirected to states
      • If people do not have a state party, they should start one or volunteer for one of the committees
        • Policy - Clarifying law and developing bylaws
        • Promotions - New State Party Development & design work
        • Press - Collaboration between state parties for blog work, press releases, and media interaction,
    • Color and logo - http://www.iPir.at/votingtbd
      • Orange Vs. Purple
  • Moderated Discussion (20 minutes)
    • If conversation exceeds this time, it will be moved to the SAB list or the next meeting.
  • Adjourn


Minutes:

  • Voting:
    • Travis elected Chair (4, 2, 1 abstain)
    • Kusanagi elected Vice-chair (4, 3)
    • QuazarGuy elected Secretary (4, 3, 1 abstain)
  • State vs. Individual membership
    • Tabled
  • Use PPI Structure
    • Tabled
  • Affiliates, such as the IT Committee, are not controlled at all by this organization
    • Passed
  • Naming
    • Generalize to just Pirate Party
  • Adjourned - next week will resume with "Redirection"


<Jamie O'Keefe> By State Party   Membership by state parties would put the emphasis on getting state parties up and running and would state parties to coordinate where they want, but to do their own things as they see fit.  Also, to get a list of pirates in the US, it would take raids of every state pirate party.   While the number of state members is small we can communicate via IRC or conference call, but once the # of states goes over 20 these methods will be difficult to sustain.  This method doesn't allow supporters who do not have a state party to easily integrate into things and may not easily provide a national voice.   By Individuals   Membership by individuals allows people to join easily and immediately say they are a pirate party member (either with dues ala Germany, or without dues ala Sweden).  It would allow us to have spokespeople and have a voice in national affairs.   It could tend to centralize policy and get people to think about the national level instead of the state and local level.  Additionally. while the actions of a member based USPP should not be binding on the state parties, it could make decisions that individual state parties would find troubling considering the composition of the state's electorate.   As the number of members grow, if not even initially, we would find that IRC would not be a useful tool for making decisions since 1. not as many people know how to use it. 2. it is difficult to make decisions or even follow conversations using it. 3. few enough people can participate at the times specified for meetings.  As such we would need to use other tools, such as Liquid Feedback.   Finally, it would also require a greater infrastructure in terms of notifying members to renew, make decisions and fundraising. 

<TravisMcCrea> It is my /strong/ belief that USPP should be an organization which is given it's power through the state parties. it should resemble PPEU or PPI in that it's limited team should be responsible for organizing state parties, and honestly only established parties have full membership, and smaller / new parties are given observer status as they are helped to grow from the efforts of their own state an <TravisMcCrea> d the USPP's small team.   There is zero point in a membership driven USPP, because there is no such thing as an ational party <TravisMcCrea> People's efforts should be directed to their state parties and the USPP must only facillitate that if we wish to succeed in US politics <TravisMcCrea> <done>