Pirate Emergency Congress 2021/Minutes/Log

This is Alex Jago's raw log of the IRC chat for Emergency National Congress 2021. Please note that all log times are in UTC+10:00, but the main time for Congress was AEST, which is UTC+11:00. Usernames prefixed with /D are on the bridged Discord channel.

This log may be referred to in conjunction with recordings of the live stream:


 * Saturday 20th: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2ay6Wqlz7o
 * Sunday 21st: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdVbeGYpyYA

--- Log opened Sat Nov 20 00:28:56 2021 00:30 < alexjago/D> CONGRESS TODO for tomorrow: 00:30 < alexjago/D> - all the elections 00:30 < alexjago/D> - PM-4 00:30 < alexjago/D> - PM-5 00:30 < alexjago/D> - PM-6 (edited) 00:32 < alexjago/D> Welcome to the meeting for the emergency National Congress. Please PM me if you're unsure whether you have voting rights for the meeting. 08:26 <~alexjago> (or me, but on the IRC side) 08:41 < alexjago/D> @zach__ test please 🙂 08:41 < zach__/D> Working now ^^ 08:43 < andrewdpirate/D> Where are we doing audio today? 08:43 < idcrisis/D> i exist 08:44 < andrewdpirate/D> Therefore you think? 08:44 < idcrisis/D> 👍 08:44 come now, we all know that inference doesn't work in that direction 08:45 < idcrisis/D> bot got me 08:48 < alexjago/D> Hey, jedb's not a bot, he's just bridged here by one 08:49 beep boop 08:49 < idcrisis/D> plus one to that sentiment... 09:19 < Satch/D> Hi folk, I'll be around, but very sick so I won't be very active. 09:23 < surprised/D> hmm - no sound on live stream - is there a technical problem at my end ?? 09:24 < alexjago/D> Nah OBS just never quite works wight 09:31 < milspec/D> In advanced audio settings make sure the relevant sources are set to "monitor and output"? 09:33 < milspec/D> Or maybe just output 09:34 < Miles/D> there's literally no sources in the audio mixer 09:34 < surprised/D> im watching on yt - can other people hear anything there? 09:34 < Miles/D> it's something in VDO ninja that is feeding audio back into obs and looping 09:37 < surprised/D> yes audio good on yt 09:38 < MarkG/D> Morning gang 09:38 < idcrisis/D> good morning 09:39 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> good morning everyone 09:41 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> mornin' 09:42 < andrewdpirate/D> mornin' 09:42 < Miles/D> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/National_Congress_Standing_Orders 09:43 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> thx 09:47 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Adopt the standing orders** 09:47 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 09:47 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 09:47 < Miles/D> aye 09:48 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 09:48 < surprised/D> aye 09:48 aye 09:48 < Satch/D> Aye 09:48 < alexjago/D> Aye 09:48 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 09:48 < zach__/D> aye 09:48 < Motion/D> aye 09:48 < mandrke/D> Aye 09:48 < the-fred/D> aye 09:48 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> aye 09:48 < TaniaB/D> Aye 09:48 * jedb considers changing his vote 09:48 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> (so many non-nc voting lol) 09:49 < idcrisis/D> aye 09:49 < andrewdpirate/D> It's not an NC only vote 09:49 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> understood 👍 09:51 < idcrisis/D> "Begin statements in IRC with the Remote Chair's IRC name." 09:51 < alexjago/D> **OK, that's CARRIED unanimously** 09:52 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Are minutes being taken in a publicly readable pad? 09:52 < alexjago/D> I'm just taking them locally right now, can switch 09:53 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> whatever's more convenient for you. 09:55 < idcrisis/D> weighted voting one day! 09:57 < idcrisis/D> to recap, internal votes, 10x for a year old member, federal votes, 2x for 10 years of voting...thanks.... 09:59 < andrewdpirate/D> No thanks 10:03 < surprised/D> its a bland porridge of a name 😦 10:03 < andrewdpirate/D> "Fusion" is powerful and united.. Nothing bland about it. 10:03 surprised: ...nuclear fusion perhaps? :P 10:03 < idcrisis/D> rest 10:04 < Miles/D> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Pirate_Emergency_Congress_2021/Constitutional_Amendments 10:04 < surprised/D> when you hear of a party called fusion - do you have any idea what it stands for ?: 10:04 surprised: you could say the same thing about a lot of parties, starting with the liberals 10:04 well, a lot of non-micro parties 10:05 < surprised/D> liberals - the name already carries a suggestion (fairly false) of what they stand for 10:05 yes, fairly false, that's my point 10:05 < surprised/D> so does pirate or swecular of climate action - each of them makes it clear what they are about 10:05 their name does not convey what they stand for 10:05 < surprised/D> but it conveys _something_ 10:06 fusion conveys it is a coalition and it has something to do with science, imo 10:06 < alexjago/D> The name on the ballot will be `Fusion: Science, Pirates, Secular, Climate Emergency` 10:06 < surprised/D> fusion is a vacuous placeholder that is so unifformative and iniffensive that it is easy to pass 10:06 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> the full name of the proposed new party is "Fusion: Science Pirate Secular Climate Emergency" 10:06 ...can we get the secular party to rename themselves to the atheist party? please? 10:07 < andrewdpirate/D> That's the name as it would be seen on the ballot 10:07 < zach__/D> Its a union to allow us to get elected, not a merger of policy, so it doesnt need to be too informative 10:07 < surprised/D> it is too late to change the name - I will be voting aye for the motion - but I will continue to argue for a better name 10:07 name arguments never die 10:07 < andrewdpirate/D> No 10:07 Science Pirate Atheist Climate Emergency - SPAAAAAACE! 10:08 < surprised/D> how about : "Science and technology" party ? 10:08 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> Secular have actually been fairly specific about not being affiliated with "athiest" 10:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Regarding the Constitutional Amendments in the Pirate Emergency Congress 2021 10:08 that's a shame 10:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Comment: 10:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> 14.7) between 6 & 18 months after an election seems quite restrictive when combined with the requirement that we are not elected... please discuss 10:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Proposed Rewrite: 10:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> 14.9.a) The pirate party will cover the nomination fees of any candidates originating from the pirate party. 10:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> 14.9.b) The pirate party may not cover the nomination fees of any candidates originating outside the pirate party. 10:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Rationale: allows for the pirate party to help smaller parties at our discretion while guaranteeing we keep our sovereignty by keeping our own costs where possible. 10:08 < surprised/D> yes agreed it is least offensive - being inoffensive helps us come together but not to gain public support 10:09 < idcrisis/D> southern cross 10:09 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Both are names Science current has operated under which would make this seem too much like just a hard merger. 10:09 < andrewdpirate/D> The idea is that groups in the Fusion alliance should not just bail on the rest if they individually happen on some success around elections. 10:09 < andrewdpirate/D> Exit is possible, and allowed for, but preferably in a good faith manner. 10:10 < surprised/D> agreed today we will join together - but we will have to review the name in future and I wanted mention of that to be part of the discussion of the current motion 10:10 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> we are already not allowed to exit while elected as part of the coalition... this would only have any effect if we have no-one elected. 10:10 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> The comment and the rewrite are seperate* 10:11 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Comment was a discussion topic. the rewrite has rationale below. 10:13 < idcrisis/D> Fusion alliance is set in stone??, that hyphenated thing was something else...for future alliance, or now propose "Southern Affairs", as in State of Affairs... 10:14 Star_Tube: if the intent is to allow PPAU to have the option of covering nomination fees for candidates originating outside the party, the wording should be "may or may not" 10:14 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> Not elected as part of the coalition, but formally elected to government as a representative of the coalition 10:15 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> How about rewording 14.9.a) as I have written but removing b) thereby not opening the option explicitly but not restricting it explicitly either. 10:16 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> @andrewdpirate ^ does this address your question? 10:17 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Basically leave it completely unwritten. 10:17 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Agreed. sounds good. 10:19 < idcrisis/D> even if the claim is made that one is campaigning for Fusion and are purportedly authorities or putting forth fusion, one would perhaps want to take Hydrogen gel on...that's just a name... 10:21 < alexjago/D> @Gold get in here 10:21 < Gold/D> Hello 10:22 < andrewdpirate/D> "Fusion" suggests a joining, in a tightly bonded way. It's also futuristic, with allusions for a limitless future power source. 10:22 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I'm not sure if andrew understood my meaning for removing b and continuing with a). a is intended to be more explicit than the present. I agree b) is not necessary. 10:22 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> point being we should not bake into our constitution that science or another party must pay for their fees. 10:22 < andrewdpirate/D> a) just says we will pay for ourselves. Which we would need to do anyway 10:23 < idcrisis/D> yes, and technically the process of generating solid hydrogen gel is a fusion-esque process... 10:23 < alexjago/D> @Star_Tube I take your point about binding others, but I also want it to account for future changes 10:24 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> fair enough. I am happy to drop it if we want to move on. I felt that leaving the possibility open to pay for other parties fees wouldn't hurt. 10:24 < alexjago/D> If that happens, it will be that "Fusion pays" not e.g. "we pay for Secular" 10:25 < andrewdpirate/D> Constitutions are for hard binding ourselves to things that we may not easily vary, as a specific consequence of the conditions we include. They're not to annotate or document general operational behaviors. 10:25 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> fair enough. so long as that is the system in place. I retract the ammendment. 10:26 < idcrisis/D> no hyphens, unless taking the word coalition for ourselves... 10:27 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Approve CAP-1** 10:27 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 10:27 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 10:27 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 10:27 < Miles/D> aye 10:27 < idcrisis/D> aye 10:27 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Aye 10:27 aye 10:27 < zach__/D> aye 10:27 < Gold/D> Aye 10:27 < mandrke/D> aye 10:27 < Satch/D> Aye 10:27 < surprised/D> aye 10:27 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 10:27 < the-fred/D> aye 10:27 < twisty/D> aye 10:27 < MarkG/D> Aye 10:27 < alexjago/D> Aye 10:28 < TaniaB/D> Aye 10:28 < Motion/D> aye 10:28 < milspec/D> Aye 10:29 < molzy/D> Aye 10:29 < MarkG/D> Nice to be back 10:30 < alexjago/D> I'm not seeing any opposed and that's been more than two minutes. 10:30 < alexjago/D> **Carried unanimously** 10:30 < alexjago/D> thank you 10:36 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Never had not enough budget for pizza money :p 10:36 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> never* 10:36 COMMENT: I'm seeing a few references to "special national congress" in there as distinct from emergency ones, in 6.1(8) and 12(2)... could that have been a better term for this sort of congress? 10:36 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> double negative... sorry. 10:37 mmmm... pizza... 10:37 < mandrke/D> @ Jedb, basically yes 10:37 <~alexjago> jedb: yes, Emergency and Special are now meant to be distinct 10:38 <~alexjago> basically both are SGMs but the motivation is different 10:38 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> All national congresses are extraordinary when it's a pirate party national congress. 10:38 but pitchforks are traditional 10:39 <~alexjago> Compare proposed 6.1(5) with 6.1(*=8) 10:39 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> ENC is for Mutiny's... Mutinies? is a mutiny a noun or a verb? 10:39 < surprised/D> This is not the proper venue for this question - but I am now curious what, if any, the mechanism is for resolving policy conflicts between different branches of the fusion coalition. 10:39 < surprised/D> pizza related question - how many members are there in tasmania (rough guess is fine) 10:39 < mandrke/D> Sean.O said: "If the meeting is happening because it's the yearly congress required by the constitution, it's Annual. If it's happening because the NC were forced to call one and had no real say in the timing (No Confidence, perhaps some kind of legal obligation), it's an Emergency Congress. If the NC called it for some other reason by their own choice, it's a Special Congress." 10:40 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> ies 10:40 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> thx. 10:41 surprised: I'd imagine that ideally you'd want to get a few non-members coming as well, lure them in with the pizza and beer, get them to become members once they're busy eating :P 10:41 < Miles/D> exactly jed 😄 10:42 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> good idea Jedb! 10:42 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> The number of members in any state (in discord) can be checked easily by mods by checking the number of members with a given role in discord. 10:43 < Miles/D> @Star_Tube plenty of our members arent on discord though, so the actual numbers will be larger 10:43 <~alexjago> and indeed many of those on Discord don't have their state tags 10:43 < Miles/D> ^ 10:43 < idcrisis/D> law of marginal utility of group dynamics... 10:43 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> agreed on both counts. depends on how you plan on organising the get together whether that rough number is relevant. 10:43 < alexjago/D> Does anyone want to speak *against* CAP-2? 10:45 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: ___** 10:45 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 10:45 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 10:46 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 10:46 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Not from nsw and all seems to be fairly bland book-keeping stuff... nothing I have issue with. 10:46 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> aye 10:46 < zach__/D> aye 10:46 < Satch/D> Aye 10:46 < alexjago/D> Aye 10:46 < surprised/D> aye 10:46 aye 10:46 < andrewdpirate/D> doh 10:46 < Miles/D> hang on 10:46 < Miles/D> its a blank motion 10:46 < alexjago/D> Whoops 10:46 < Miles/D> stop voting 10:46 < zach__/D> Nothing passes? 10:46 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Approve CAP-2** 10:46 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 10:46 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 10:46 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I agree with NOTHING! 10:46 < surprised/D> intended vote on cap-2 10:46 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 10:46 < surprised/D> aye 10:46 < zach__/D> aye 10:46 < alexjago/D> there we go 10:46 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Aye 10:46 < Miles/D> aye 10:46 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 10:46 < mandrke/D> aye 10:46 < Satch/D> Aye 10:46 abstain 10:46 a true neutral motion 10:47 < Gold/D> Aye 10:47 < twisty/D> nay 10:47 < idcrisis/D> aye 10:47 < Motion/D> aye 10:47 < TaniaB/D> Aye 10:47 < alexjago/D> ooh, Twisty votes against 10:47 < milspec/D> Aye 10:47 < MarkG/D> Aye 10:47 < alexjago/D> Aye 10:49 < mandrke/D> https://youtu.be/-hrsEl1O-Bs 10:50 < alexjago/D> I make that 15 for, 1 against, 1 abstention 10:50 < Miles/D> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Pirate_Emergency_Congress_2021/Motions 10:53 < idcrisis/D> womad...diffusion 10:53 < milspec/D> Aye 10:54 < alexjago/D> @Justine123 in here 10:54 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> didn't we already vote on FM-1? 10:55 < alexjago/D> no, we voted on CAP-1 10:55 < idcrisis/D> that was cap-1 10:55 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> ah dw nvrmind. 10:55 < Gold/D> I think this may just be a name change itself. 10:55 < zach__/D> cap-1 was the option in constitution to affiliate, fm-1 is actually joining this one 10:55 < Gold/D> Sorry, that was what I meant with my words. I'll put on my glasses 10:55 < milspec/D> Aye 10:56 < alexjago/D> I still haven't put the motion lol @milspec 10:57 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Approve FM-1** 10:57 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 10:57 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 10:57 < Motion/D> aye 10:58 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 10:58 < Miles/D> aye 10:58 < zach__/D> aye 10:58 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 10:58 < twisty/D> aye 10:58 aye 10:58 < Satch/D> Aye 10:58 < idcrisis/D> nay 10:58 < Gold/D> Aye 10:58 < surprised/D> aye 10:58 < the-fred/D> Aye 10:58 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> regarding that can we have some more centralised organisation of that? some sort of boards or whatnot for organising. 10:58 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Aye 10:58 < TaniaB/D> Aye 10:58 < alexjago/D> aye 10:58 affiliate to SPACE!!! as pronounced by a snake 10:58 < molzy/D> Aye 10:58 < Motion/D> sorry Andrew 10:58 < mandrke/D> Aye 10:59 < MarkG/D> Aye 10:59 < idcrisis/D> southern alliance? 10:59 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> not regarding necessarily fusion but also internally... regarding organising working groups. 11:00 <~alexjago> as opposed to drinking the pizza and eating the beer? 11:01 < Justine123/D> Aye 11:01 < zach__/D> grease dripping off a thin base pepperoni..? 11:01 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Fusion must assign at least 1% of funds to pizza/beer cash. 11:01 < milspec/D> Aye 11:01 < milspec/D> Lol sorry I was driving 11:02 COMMENT: some movie or something mentioned "pizza in a cup" at some point 11:02 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> brb 11:02 < alexjago/D> I think that's time. milspec you snuck under the wire 11:02 < Gold/D> Given that there was mention of a Fusion discord server, would it be best to link it somewhere? 11:02 < alexjago/D> There is no motionbot 11:02 < alexjago/D> it's me 11:03 < alexjago/D> I make it 19 for and 1 against 11:03 < andrewdpirate/D> @alexbot 11:03 "you thought it was motionbot but it was I, alexjago!" 11:04 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> yea so regarding the centralised work group organisation... having an official place to organise meeting time/dates for policy development groups as well as groups and meeting places for public groups would be nice... discord organisation tends to get either washed away in a disappointingly short time or not noticed in some silent channel. 11:04 < Miles/D> @jedb 11:04 < Miles/D> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/580190396110340107/911421807200968804/download.jpg 11:05 < surprised/D> can i have a link to pm1 pls 11:05 < Miles/D> @startube we have channels here on discord for the PPAU committees and working groups which should be visible to all members 11:05 < Miles/D> PM1 can be found here https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Pirate_Emergency_Congress_2021/Motions#PM-1:_Sovereign_Wealth_Fund 11:05 < surprised/D> thx @Miles 11:11 < idcrisis/D> i can cozy up to mining...my father is a miner... 11:12 < milspec/D> Well put Andrew. Can't agree more. 11:12 < milspec/D> Well put Andrew. Agree 100% (edited) 11:13 < surprised/D> 1) curious about effects on existing stakeholders. Holders of mining rights for instance. 11:13 < surprised/D> 2) what is the current effective tax rate on major mining companies 11:13 < surprised/D> 3) how do our mining costs compare to other countries 11:13 < surprised/D> apologies again - these questions would be better put to the com,mittee rather than dumped into the final vote discussion 11:14 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Sorry if you covered it but is there a reason for the gradual transition from normal tax to royalty as opposed to an immediate transition? 11:15 < Motion/D> lockstep 11:15 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> (I half zoned out but we have been over this many times on social friday's so I understand the gist of your policy... that part just stood out) 11:15 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> (I half zoned out but we have been over this many times on social fridays so I understand the gist of your policy... that part just stood out) (edited) 11:16 < idcrisis/D> very high 11:16 < idcrisis/D> cost to man 11:16 < surprised/D> I understand that mining companies pay the same tax rate - but trying to get a sense of how low the existing tax rate is. 11:16 Star_Tube: things like this always have gradual transitional provisions so as to not drastically upset the economic apple cart too quickly 11:17 <~alexjago> The corporate tax rate is (alledgedly) 30% of profits 11:17 < milspec/D> Don't we have really cheap iron ore compared to other countries 11:17 < surprised/D> So it seems that the net effect is to redirect funds from state governemnt to a federal sovereign wealth fund - how do you propose to compensate state governemtns for the loss of income ?? 11:17 < surprised/D> tanstafl 11:18 < idcrisis/D> it's a dot on the lanscape...uncapped coal chimneys are the ones... 11:18 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> fair enough. seems like if it were just redirecting the tax income from the mining sector to swf then it shouldn't have an economic effect... which is my understanding of this policy. 11:19 < surprised/D> since the effect in supposed to be income neutral on the companies - the effect is to reduce state funding - the money has to come from somewhere 11:19 < idcrisis/D> don't tax heat from the chimney...tax co2... 11:19 < idcrisis/D> and other particulates per million 11:22 < Gold/D> From what I remember, Norway actually takes quite a large percentage of the revenue from oil extraction (can't find the exact number currently). I wonder if our current tax rate is enough to establish a useful SWF for the future, but I understand the point in not wanting to create uncertainty for the mining companies. 11:23 < Justine123/D> That is not clear in the motion put. 11:23 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> That may be a longer term goal Gold, increasing the royalty after it's implemented will be alot easier than implementing it with an increase inherently. 11:24 < idcrisis/D> cloud cover is lacking...required...and since we're stoking this, use of perfectly innocuous salts to create cloud cover means lower cancer rates and they don't need to generate heat and thus cloud cover... 11:24 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> one will call down the propoganda engines of the mining industry... the other might but may not. 11:24 < MarkG/D> COMMENT: Australia gets less public benefit from its resource wealth than any other major resource country. Many resource companies are multinational, and abscond with the profits 11:25 < surprised/D> I'm all in favour of a sovereign wealth fund and will probably vote in favour of this this policy, although I view it as deeply deeply flawed. It smacks of sleight of hand accounting. The money to go into the southern wealth fund is going to come from somewhere. The policy excludes it coming from companies since it's meant to be tax-neutral. It excludes it coming from state go 11:25 < surprised/D> vernments. Therefore, it comes from federal company tax income. What government services are proposed to be cut in order to afford this loss of income???) 11:25 < surprised/D> far better to fearlessly accept increasing the price paid by mining companies 11:25 < idcrisis/D> bet on cloud cover! 11:26 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Would the SWF be held in AUD? If not or undefined would the managing of the SWF's currency be beaurocratic or policy in nature? 11:26 < Justine123/D> I wonder how many resource companies actually pay much tax - if any at all. 11:27 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> What percent does mining income make of the national budget at the moment? 11:27 < milspec/D> I guess we can leave company tax alone and just increase royalties 11:27 surprised: PM-1 as written does mention using any and all profits above inflation from the SWF to fund government services 11:27 < zach__/D> @Justine123 they do pay employees income tax 11:28 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> @andrewdpirate Any response to this? 11:28 < idcrisis/D> carbon price has reached it's end of life on a rhetoric and news cycle emotional exhaustion basis 11:29 < alexjago/D> Mining companies don't get to shift profits but they do get to offset losses 11:29 < alexjago/D> (as Andrew is saying now) 11:29 < Justine123/D> @Zach - the companies pay the tax FOR the employees or the employees pay their own? I suggest the latter. This is one of the ways they can afford to pay their executives obscene salaries, (+ Shares, + other perks) 11:29 < idcrisis/D> open source the smart meter... 11:30 < alexjago/D> To be fair a huge amount of mining investment is only usable for that specific mine 11:30 < zach__/D> @Justine123 the employer might choose a job based on post-tax income, not pre-tax 11:30 < zach__/D> employee** 11:31 COMMENT: this policy in general is somewhat similar to the Mineral Resource Rent Tax from 2012 to 2014 11:31 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Sorry I got distracted... has andrew addressed the management of the SWF? or is the short and long of it that we would mirror norways technique? 11:31 < idcrisis/D> profit itself is realised overseas..so cannot be taxed in australia...one would have to use continent law... 11:32 < mandrke/D> xbt! 11:33 < mandrke/D> SWF should be stored in XBT! (edited) 11:33 < milspec/D> Should the royalty rate be a function of iron ore price? 11:33 < idcrisis/D> the easiest is to deduct tax at source, like eftpos...else just tell them a token amout and they'll just pay it... 11:34 < milspec/D> Yeah profit based taxes are easily foiled 11:34 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> alright, should the policy mention our plan on how to manage the SWF? if I am reading it correctly then it does not currently, it just says we support a SWF regardless of management methodology so long as it takes from the mining industry. 11:34 <~alexjago> anything that's a function of ore price is effectively on profits 11:35 I brought up the similarity to the MRRT mainly to be aware of the predictable opposition from the Liberals and the mining industry itself 11:35 < idcrisis/D> "Gradually reduce mining corporate taxation over time" 11:36 < milspec/D> Hmm I'm no sure about that Alex, because profits, as Andrew was saying, can be shuffled by the company. A function of ore price is more solid 11:36 < idcrisis/D> if the unit ( denominator ) of the tax at eftpos is not money but the resource...it's different 11:37 <~alexjago> yes, my bad - it'd be a revenue tax, not a prfits tax 11:37 < surprised/D> Unlike greens I believe that an inadequate policy should still be adopted even if it is not yet "good enough", PROVIDED it is a step in the right direction. I regard this policy as such a step, even though flawed. Further research on comparison to international mining operations is required. Also curious to know how elastic the demand for Australian minerals is compared to, say, 11:37 < surprised/D> Norwegian crude oil. 11:37 < surprised/D> if we pass this the committee will continue to exist on do research on this policy? or is this the conclusion of their efforts for the time being? 11:37 < idcrisis/D> it's time to get ugly... 11:37 < surprised/D> Unlike greens I believe that an inadequate policy should still be adopted even if it is not yet "good enough", PROVIDED it is a step in the right direction. I regard this policy as such a step, even though flawed. Further research on comparison to international mining operations is required. Also curious to know how elastic the demand for Australian minerals is compared to, say, 11:37 < surprised/D> Norwegian crude oil. 11:37 < surprised/D> if we pass this the committee will continue to exist and research on this policy? or is this the conclusion of their efforts for the time being? (edited) 11:37 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> we discussed I believe the resource tax being accompanied with strong, well founded import and export tariffs to reduce/prevent income shuffling. 11:37 <~alexjago> @surprised the PDC exists indefinitely and can go back and update it at their pleasure 11:38 <~alexjago> (well, subject to member ratification) 11:38 < Miles/D> members can also develop and propose policy amendments independant of the committee, the committee just exists to support, coordinate and promote the continued development of party policy 11:39 < surprised/D> If much less % of mining income goes to the australian government than in other countries that supports the case for increasing tax/royalties from australian companies 11:39 < idcrisis/D> fictional tax audit statement..."we paid 10 quintals of coal in tax last year" 11:39 < surprised/D> happy to join and provide a productive contribution in future 11:40 < surprised/D> the push back will be that any such increase in royalties will drive mining companies overseas - hence the need for international comparisons. 11:40 < idcrisis/D> they can simply declare it in english... 11:40 < idcrisis/D> as it is the accounting software doesn't work now....after the mygov upgrades... 11:41 < Justine123/D> @Andrew - could you restate the resolution you put before regarding no loss to state income; royalties taken after state royalties paid... (you put it so well) 11:42 < milspec/D> Would tariffs prevent income shuffling? Eg. If a mining company has HQ in Ireland that licences IP to their Australian subsidiary. Profits get shuffled to Ireland. Not sure how a tariff will stop that 11:43 < alexjago/D> MOTION: amend PM-1 to read "Redirect additional royalty payments into an Australian Sovereign Wealth Fund (AWSF)" 11:43 < alexjago/D> MOTION: amend PM-1 to read "Redirect the additional royalty payments into an Australian Sovereign Wealth Fund (AWSF)" (edited) 11:44 < twisty/D> aye 11:44 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> (ASWF)? 11:44 < mandrke/D> Aye 11:44 < milspec/D> Aye 11:44 < alexjago/D> Actually scratch that, I need to rework the Sentence 11:44 < alexjago/D> WITHDRAWN 11:44 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 11:44 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Prevents them from selling the iron to anyone... since it's a royalty it is taxed at extraction and tariff taxes on export regardless of income. 11:45 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> prevents them from gaining value from moving iron around... 11:45 < Justine123/D> It does say that but easy to misinterpret. "As royalty payments increase, redirect them into ..." change redirect 'them' to redirect 'the increase" 11:45 < andrewdpirate/D> Can you express it as a change to "As royalty payments increase, redirect them into an Australian Sovereign Wealth Fund (ASWF)." in the existing text ? 11:45 < Justine123/D> @Andrew - It does say that but easy to misinterpret. "As royalty payments increase, redirect them into ..." change redirect 'them' to redirect 'the increase" (edited) 11:46 < idcrisis/D> aye 11:46 < alexjago/D> Yeah Justine's proposal is actually exactly right 11:46 < milspec/D> Ah yes, a royalty based tax (at extraction) would be difficult to dodge. I was saying that a profits based tax would be easier to dodge - even with tariffs 11:47 < Justine123/D> Shall I propose that? 11:47 < alexjago/D> Proposed motion (don't vote yet): Amend PM-1 so that "As royalty payments increase, redirect them into an Australian Sovereign Wealth Fund (ASWF)." now reads "As royalty payments increase, redirect the increase into an Australian Sovereign Wealth Fund (ASWF)." 11:47 < andrewdpirate/D> I accept that motion as put. 11:48 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> would "the entirety" be better than "the increase"? 11:48 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> whichever you think most concise and easiest to read. 11:49 < idcrisis/D> what about land rehabilitation, flood it with a lake... 11:49 < alexjago/D> no, because existing royalties go to state govts 11:50 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> understood and agreed to. 11:50 < alexjago/D> I would prefer to not change the tax rate TBH, it's a special-case 11:51 < idcrisis/D> reources unit of tax 11:52 < idcrisis/D> no man doesn't pay you for CO2... 11:53 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 11:53 < surprised/D> aye 11:53 < Justine123/D> aye 11:53 < idcrisis/D> aye 11:53 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Approve PM-1 (as amended)** 11:53 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 11:53 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 11:53 < twisty/D> lol 11:53 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> aye 11:53 < Miles/D> aye 11:53 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 11:53 < zach__/D> aye 11:53 < MarkG/D> Aye 11:53 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I was first after the motion 11:53 < milspec/D> Aye 11:53 < twisty/D> aye 11:53 aye 11:53 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 11:53 < Satch/D> Aye 11:53 < idcrisis/D> aye 11:53 < zach__/D> werent first this time 😛 11:53 < mandrke/D> aye 11:53 < Gold/D> Aye 11:53 < surprised/D> aye 11:53 < Motion/D> aye 11:54 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> *win streak lost* 11:54 < alexjago/D> Aye 11:55 < Justine123/D> aye again 11:55 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> While we wait... I gotta say that this Dewar's scotch is definitely agreeing with me today. 11:55 < alexjago/D> I make that as carried unanimously 11:57 < idcrisis/D> quiz apps 11:58 < surprised/D> SO HAPPY 😍 - learning styles are a complete myth !! great to recognise that 🙂 11:58 < Miles/D> https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2021.708540/full 11:59 < twisty/D> I hear, I forget. I see, I remember. I do, I understand. 11:59 < surprised/D> I am of the radical opinion that the best way to teach someone how to do something is to tell them. 12:00 < zach__/D> Using all of these is likely most effective 12:00 < idcrisis/D> let the fake tts plugin actually read the quiz question out loud, and also accept spoken answers...around 80% easier learning... 12:00 < alexjago/D> NGL that is pretty radical 12:01 < surprised/D> can I get a link to the education policy pls - searched Education and skills and couldnt find word "styles" 12:02 < surprised/D> completely agree AndrewD 12:02 < Miles/D> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Platform#Schools_and_early_education under "School education", first paragraph 12:03 surprised: I am of the slightly more radical opinion that the best way to ensure that someone is paying attention and understands what you're trying to teach them is to have them tell you 12:03 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I agree with the proposal as suggested since it is strictly an improvement and in no way reductive... on a parallel note the same paragraph it says: 12:03 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> > Teachers have great autonomy,... 12:03 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Might be better to describe this in relative terms, for example: 12:03 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> > Teachers have greater autonomy,... 12:03 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> or potentially even relative to an object: 12:03 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> > Teachers have greater autonomy than currently in Australia,... 12:03 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I will defer to someone else whether that should be a seperate motion or whatever. 12:03 < surprised/D> Finland is longer the top ranked system by most measures 12:04 < surprised/D> The textbooks are proscribed and standardised across Finland 12:04 < surprised/D> vygotsky 12:05 < surprised/D> but are these theories any good? 12:05 < milspec/D> What's happening after PM2 12:05 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> lunch 12:05 < surprised/D> all education research is undermimned by the incredible difference introduced by individual teachers which cannot be double blinded 12:05 < milspec/D> What's happening after PM2? Any more motions? (edited) 12:05 < alexjago/D> yeah but ther 12:05 < alexjago/D> is nothing after lunch 12:05 < alexjago/D> I acknowledge that Miles wanted to do i all today 12:06 < surprised/D> indeed my claim is that these theories are largely untestable 12:06 < surprised/D> I didnt say true- I said good 12:06 < alexjago/D> but I didn't know how long we were going to argue today 12:06 < alexjago/D> and I had to account for that when planning 12:06 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> Miles could probably go for a couple more hours on this topic alone 12:06 < andrewdpirate/D> All the more reason not to tie policy to specific theories. 12:06 < idcrisis/D> empirical methods by definition an approximation... 12:06 < milspec/D> So after lunch were not continuing this Congres? 12:07 < milspec/D> So after lunch were not continuing this Congress? (edited) 12:07 < surprised/D> no educational theories are derided by actual teachers - they are a plaything of academic researchers - the people who could not cope in the classroom 12:07 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> could we just go till a pre-designated time then pick back up where we leave off tomorrow? or is that not the way we do things in practice? 12:07 < surprised/D> No. Educational theories are derided by actual teachers - they are a plaything of academic researchers - the people who could not cope in the classroom (edited) 12:07 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> can I confirm are we still discussing the motion? or just general discussion now? 12:07 < idcrisis/D> a genetic program trained by minimising euclidean distance instead of std deviation can give ten equivalent equations for each known equation... 12:07 < alexjago/D> If people want to put floor motions then we can continue after lunch 12:08 < surprised/D> I deny that there has been meaningful progress in educational theory for the last 3 or 4 decades 12:08 empirical theories tend to describe effects in the world that are much more extensive than the theory itself, and so they necessarily miss tiny details sometimes, especially if there is any chaos involved 12:08 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Approve PM-2** 12:08 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 12:08 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 12:08 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 12:08 < idcrisis/D> nay 12:08 < Motion/D> aye 12:08 aye 12:08 < zach__/D> aye 12:08 < surprised/D> aye 12:08 < Satch/D> Aye 12:08 < mandrke/D> aye 12:08 < Miles/D> aye 12:08 < alexjago/D> aye 12:08 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 12:08 < milspec/D> Aye 12:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I feel like this can become a motion of itself if it doesn't fit in the perview of the current motion. 12:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> aye 12:08 < Gold/D> Aye 12:08 < Justine123/D> aye 12:08 < twisty/D> aye 12:09 < idcrisis/D> the motion as worded increases cost of education per capita... 12:09 < MarkG/D> Aye 12:10 < surprised/D> inclusive education - lets get specific. In NSW female students elect to study physics at a much lower rate than they do other subjects. Should we drop the more demanding mathematics in physics and introduce a more "narrative" approach in order to make the subject more appealing to female students ? 12:10 < alexjago/D> I make it as 16 for, 1 against 12:11 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> potentially... it also may reduce the cost of useless textbooks and increase quality by allowing skipping or shortening topics. 12:11 < twisty/D> end early 12:11 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I don't mind. I've got no plans either way. 12:11 < alexjago/D> I don't mind what we do as long as I get to go to lunch 12:11 surprised: that sounds sexist 12:12 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> I'm easy. I'm with Alex 12:12 < zach__/D> @jedb, its empirical 12:12 < Justine123/D> @miles - i agree. 12:12 < zach__/D> or.. which part are you claiming is..? 12:12 < twisty/D> as you like. I'll check back in later 12:13 zach__: the part where the material is dumbed down to try and appeal to one gender 12:13 < zach__/D> @jedb, fair, but it aligns with policy mentioning 'equity' 12:13 < alexjago/D> **Procedural MOTION: Amend the Agenda such that the discussion from tomorrow afternoon instead occur this afternoon.** 12:14 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 12:14 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 12:14 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 12:14 < Miles/D> aye 12:14 < milspec/D> The part that I loved about physics was the maths part. That's what got me excited enough to study it at uni. 12:14 < zach__/D> aye 12:14 < alexjago/D> aye 12:14 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 12:14 abstain 12:14 < Satch/D> Aye 12:14 < mandrke/D> aye 12:14 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> abstain 12:14 < twisty/D> aye 12:14 < Gold/D> abstain 12:14 < milspec/D> Abstain 12:14 < idcrisis/D> aye 12:15 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> *abstaining because really not worried... I hope I understand correctly that an abstain is not counted. 12:15 < TaniaB/D> Abstain I missed all the discussion. 12:15 < milspec/D> Abstaining because im not sure I can make that part of the Congress regardless of the vote outcome. My apologies guys 12:15 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> *also am available tomorrow for tomorrow discussions so... 12:16 < alexjago/D> I make that 9 for, 4 abstain 12:16 I don't really care either way and since either way I'm available and sitting at home in a time zone 2 hours ahead of eastern Aust... meh 12:16 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> oh... is abstain counted against qorum? oof... will stay quiet next time XD 12:16 < milspec/D> Yeah I didn't know 12:16 < alexjago/D> Congress... doesn't really have quorum 12:17 < milspec/D> I can change mine to aye lol 12:17 < milspec/D> There's zero nays 12:17 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 12:17 < Justine123/D> yes 12:17 < TaniaB/D> Happy to change mine to aye 12:17 < alexjago/D> **Procedural MOTION: Break for lunch for 1 hour** 12:17 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 12:17 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 12:18 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 12:18 < alexjago/D> Aye 12:18 < milspec/D> Aye 12:18 < zach__/D> aye 12:18 aye 12:18 < Miles/D> aye 12:18 < Satch/D> Aye 12:18 < andrewdpirate/D> Aye 12:18 < idcrisis/D> aye 12:18 < TaniaB/D> Aye 12:18 < twisty/D> aye 12:18 < Gold/D> Aye 12:18 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> god I love bureaucracy XD 12:18 < mandrke/D> aye 12:18 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> aye 12:18 * jedb is tempted to change his vote 12:19 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> what if I plan on not eating? is voting aye considered a commitment to eat? 12:19 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> damn 12:19 < alexjago/D> VOTING AYE IS NOT A COMMITMENT TO EAT 12:19 Star_Tube: as established earlier, drinking beer counts as eating for the purposes of lunch here 12:19 < zach__/D> ill eat some water for lunch 12:19 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> mob rule XD 12:19 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> is scotch counted in that? 12:20 < alexjago/D> PERSONALLY I WILL BE BREAKIGN FOR BREAKFAST 12:20 < alexjago/D> CARRIED, SEE YOU IN AN HOUR 12:21 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> eat quick! that way you can have one bite of Bfast then eat lunch as per the vote. 12:22 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I will be in #General Voice for anyone wanting to chat during the break. 12:25 <~alexjago> First batch of Minutes are up 12:25 <~alexjago> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Pirate_Emergency_Congress_2021/Minutes 12:34 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> could someone with permissions pin all the relevant links in this channel? 12:35 < zach__/D> This link has some of the relevant ones in it: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Pirate_Emergency_Congress_2021 12:48 < alexjago/D> (and everything else is linked from that page) 13:16 < Miles/D> we're coming back in 5 minutes 13:22 < Miles/D> @Dread Pirate Roger @andrewdpirate @alexjago 13:23 < alexjago/D> So we are 13:26 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Audio is good. 13:27 < Miles/D> <@&358404846354825216> we are returning 13:27 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Yea the whole stream seems to be running a tad late. I know that OBS has a setting to force delay which it defaults iirc to a minute or so... idk what the stream is currently set to. 13:27 < alexjago/D> @surprised up here 13:28 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> yea seemed to be less if you responded after I sent that message... it is manageable for certain. 13:28 < surprised/D> ah here i am 13:30 the internet is an ocean, easy to float around in but you may easily get lost if you go too far out 13:31 < surprised/D> I assume that most efforts to field PPA election candidates have focused on upper houses. Previously how many candidates have we fielded and (roughly) in which state and federal houses? 13:31 < surprised/D> How many candidates for the upcoming election are we thinking of putting forward? 13:31 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> jebd: Pirate Poet 13:31 <~alexjago> Star_Tube - the election timeframes is why I said "you can leave 6-18 months after the election" -- later is too late really 13:32 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> We typically try to put 2 senate candidates per state 13:32 < surprised/D> where are the candidates ?? all federal upper house? 13:33 < surprised/D> thanks @Dread Pirate Roger 13:33 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> fair enough. so if we get elected are we obligated to remain in the federation/coalition/fusion until we don't get elected again? that is my reading of the ammendment. 13:33 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> ^ 13:34 surprised: typically Vic, NSW, Qld, occasionally WA and Tas, all in federal upper house yes 13:34 < alexjago/D> yeah if elected then we're there for the term (you're elected as X, you should stay as X) 13:34 < alexjago/D> What we'll actually do this weekend is nominate candidates for either upper or lower house in their state, and leave the exact decision for a little later 13:35 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> but then we're also obligated to run under fusion next election aren't we? or can we express our intent to pull out for the next election while functioning in fusion for the rest of the present term? 13:35 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> (ik... corner case but humour me 😛 ) 13:36 < surprised/D> responsibility ?? 13:36 < Gold/D> culpability? 13:39 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Many bikies are chill... sorta like many hacker/coder/scripters are chill... not all of us are black hat hackers! 13:39 the only law I'd love to hit bikies with is noise pollution law 13:40 <~alexjago> and let's not forget basic income! 13:40 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> jedb: I would broaden that to road users. no need to restrict that to bikies nor any reason to protect them. 13:41 Star_Tube: agreed, it's just that bikies tend to be the most egregious offenders with excessive noise 13:42 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I am sure if jedb feels strongly enough about it he can start a working group XD 13:42 it's quite far down the list 13:43 <~alexjago> if we want to quit Fusion after the election, then someone will have to put a motion for that at annual national congress next year and it can take effect by the end of next year 13:44 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> To clarify this question; If we get someone into office in an election then we want to run separate in the next election what method do we have to do that? not that we plan on doing it but I don't like Pirates being inextricably tied to Fusion permanently without refraining from runing for an election... 13:44 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> sorry didn't see this before hitting enter... somewhat answers my question. 13:45 <~alexjago> (unless we get someone elected, in which case we're in Fusion until we lose) 13:46 technically leaving Fusion while elected could be done by simply first amending the party constitution 13:46 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> This seems like a problem to me... but maybe that's just me. 13:46 <~alexjago> yeah, sure. It's a declaration of intent 13:47 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> leaving while elected would be a bit of a dick move 13:47 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> in which case I think it's a negative intent... but it's been passed so I will save the discussion for potentially next national congress. 13:48 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> expressing intent to leave for the next election while being tied to the federation until said election. 13:48 < alexjago/D> basically, we wouldn't want to help other people get elected only to have them say "lol bye", and I think it's fair to commit not to do that ourselves 13:50 one would expect that no party would be too willing to go "lolbye" unless they've grown big enough in votes/memberbase to no longer need the coalition, so there's that 13:52 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> If the understanding is that we are fore-going that level of sovereignty voluntarily then I can understand that... I don't like it personally but if that is the intention and is understood to be what we are voting on then I can agree to moving on. 13:52 <~alexjago> as for CAPs, the CAP threshold is higher than the [dis]affiliation threshold ;P 13:54 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> my concern is if (in the unlikely circumstance) that all other branches catastrophically fail and we see unprecedented success then how can we defend from their parties being infiltrated then their small parties then vote to change the fusion constitution to restrict us... basically our movement would be to amend our constitution to allow us to leave, am I correct? 13:54 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> god forbid that situation happen* 13:56 Star_Tube: things like that would be one reason why PPAU reserves the right to amend our own constitution, I think 13:57 < andrewdpirate/D> We retain our own autonomy within Fusion. We've set our own exit criteria. 13:57 < andrewdpirate/D> Also, you just voted on those this morning. 13:58 lol 13:58 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> currently our exit criteria is when we fail to get elected and choose to... I simply think failure shouldn't be a condition. 13:58 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> if ammending the constitution is the option in that corner case then that is fine. 13:59 <~alexjago> what we need most of all boots on the ground starting four weeks before the election - need people putting up their hands for city-level coordinator 13:59 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> doesn't mean I will stop thinking about corner-case-faults in the system as implemented. this one isn't so important I would vote against it. 14:00 < andrewdpirate/D> Success is a condition for moderate continuation of commitment. Failure doesn't bind us like that. Even so, it's within our own constitution, that we could change with some notice, if that really became necessary. 14:00 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> alright. that is fine. 14:03 < Miles/D> i would be happy with even having state level coordinators 😧 14:04 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Agreed. So long as there is a theoretical, functional way of leaving I am satisfied. I also do want to focus on ways of moving forward well in fusion and I feel that maintaining our theoretical sovereignty is important in that cause. 14:04 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> helps to show that we aren't captive in fusion*^ 14:05 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> The constitution should be a living document. very much so. 14:06 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> (sorry if I am hogging the chat... someone else talk XD) 14:06 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> Now discussing: campaigning 14:09 <~alexjago> Science have tried some stuff in NSW yeah, they're very Sydney focused 14:09 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> could we have fusion level working groups which each branch can appoint members into and their point is to create fusion specific policy on their topic as well as (and more topically) making PRs and whatnot. 14:09 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> as opposed to individuals in fusion... 14:11 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> Fusion itself doesn't specifically have its own policy ... but there is currently a Fusion policy working group that is working on how we communicate the shared viewpoints 14:12 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> can the fusion discord please be added to #🔀server-sharing 14:13 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> ah understood. I will watch this space then. 14:14 have any other parties been approached for this Fusion thing? is there a list? 14:21 <~alexjago> certain other parties who shall not be named had a more "you can join us" attitude 14:21 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Are there any australian equivalents of parties that other pirate parties (internationally) have worked well with? such as iceland? 14:21 < surprised/D> we have emphasised commonalities - can anyone say what the key differences are between, say, the PPA and the Science party australia ? 14:23 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> but au-greens are a tad too uppity themselves to work with us... to put it bluntly. 14:23 I wouldn't want to work with the Greens anyway to be honest 14:23 < idcrisis/D> prefrontal cortex is the north...but that's taken by religion...so south... 14:23 <~alexjago> bluntly, the Greens are too big for us to work with presently 14:24 <~alexjago> if you want to win a House of Representatives seat as a minor party, you need ~500 people just in that seat 14:24 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Mostly focus is my understanding. we agree on most policies but they focus on science, we focus on internet freedom. 14:25 < surprised/D> ok - so primarily you see it as a difference of emphasis - thx 14:26 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> so even on areas we dont necessarily agree on policy we tend to be able to integrate well once we talk about it deeper. 14:28 alexjago: the only parties that came to my mind as possibilities were the Cyclist party (who at one point grouped with the Science party, but these days have merged with the Sex party to form the Reason party) and Sustainable Australia, but since they both have seats in Vic legislative council they're probably in the "you can join us" group 14:28 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Similarly some of us haven't looked at the science issues the way they have and plenty of us have had eye-open, aha, moments when they start talking about that. 14:30 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> jedb: I imagine the fusion constitution is being set up such that they can join down the line if they so wish and if fusion sees some success or (god forbid) they fall to a level where they see it as advantageous. 14:31 < alexjago/D> @Maff @thesunnyk 14:31 < andrewdpirate/D> There's a scale issue. Above a certain scale of current exposure in Australia, merging starts looking less appealing, and they would prefer to control and maybe offer you to be absorbed. 14:32 < andrewdpirate/D> Sex Party for instance (though I think they had a name change) are probably too large to consider merging as equals with us. 14:32 <~alexjago> Sex are Reason now 14:32 COMMENT: at the bare minimum the current legislative ban on nuclear power generation in Australia is definitely a potential policy issue 14:32 < andrewdpirate/D> yeah 14:32 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> ban on not only generation but also research plants... very silly. worth discussion. 14:33 <~alexjago> COMMENT: the part where even Andrew, who is literally a political party executive, can't remember that a closely aligned party has changed their name, is the biggest argument I have for keeping all our names on the ballot 14:33 < idcrisis/D> thorium is abundant and cannot be used for negative purposes... 14:33 < andrewdpirate/D> "even Andrew" - I'm terrible with names. 14:34 idcrisis: that's quitter talk, you can use it for negative purposes if you try hard enough :P 14:34 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> alex: can we put nick-names on nominations? is roger-science a reasonable nickname to put on? 14:34 < idcrisis/D> no 14:34 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> alex: can we put nick-names on nominations? is roger-pirate a reasonable nickname to put on? (edited) 14:34 < zach__/D> you can smack someone over the head with it 14:35 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I mean... will that end up on the ballot? 14:35 < idcrisis/D> there is no fusion involved... 14:36 < andrewdpirate/D> "Roger of the Fusion:Pirate faction".... 14:36 < andrewdpirate/D> Though we've been trying tyo avoid the "faction" word 14:36 < andrewdpirate/D>, so maybe more like "Roger of the Fusion:Pirate branch".... 14:37 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> "Roger, Pirate of Fusion" 14:37 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> "Micheal, Scientist of Fusion" 14:37 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> whatever whoever comes up with in the other two... 14:37 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> ? 14:37 pirate -> crew; science -> research group; climate -> branch; secular -> church 14:37 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> above phrased as suggestion not statement* 14:38 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> jedb: I am gonna send you a bill for the scotch I almost spat out from you calling secular a church. 14:38 < zach__/D> 'faction' is related to 'factionalism', which also sounds less than cordial 14:39 < idcrisis/D> vote for the impossible dream of using more energy to join a molecule when there exist other ways to arrive at the bound molecule of hydrogen... 14:39 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> (gotta love when majors implement mail in voting which hurts grass roots movements while increasing the bar small parties have to hit...) 14:41 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Is the plan to do (a) joint fusion flyer(s) or separate branch flyers 14:41 logistics is the lifeblood and backbone of politics (and war) 14:42 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> if joint what validation process do we need to go through as fusion to ensure the flyers are agreed upon... 14:42 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> (Please dont answer the above yet... I'll brb) 14:43 < Satch/D> And video editing. 😉 14:43 < idcrisis/D> fusion: there are 2 hs when there are... 14:44 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> I am back. 14:45 < idcrisis/D> aussie-zone: there were always three Os 14:45 < idcrisis/D> are you sitting for this?? 14:46 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Alex the dancing pixels! so beautiful, so brave! 14:47 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Bye!! 14:48 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> jk... I believe in you. 14:48 < idcrisis/D> fusion: things that make you go hmm... 14:48 < zach__/D> 'electron'? 14:48 I swear to god, if you call this electron I'm leaving 14:49 < alexjago/D> Electron was the original proposed name, but nobody was called Ron 14:49 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> dw it's fusion jed 14:49 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> dw, it's fusion, jed* 14:50 < idcrisis/D> fusion: there is a tabla.... 14:50 < Miles/D> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/580190396110340107/911478499112525875/electron_-_Copy.png 14:51 < zach__/D> 5-way venn diagram for a 4 party union. makes sense 14:51 venn diagrams with more than three sets are a pain in the ass 14:51 < idcrisis/D> fusion: sound the sound 14:51 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> 5 way looks better than 4 way... aesthetics trump pragmatism in branding. 14:52 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> it's conceptually ben. 14:52 < idcrisis/D> fusion: pirate for hydrogen... 14:53 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> are those public meetings in fusion? I am more than willing to help but feel a tad lost without a tad bit of direction. 14:53 < idcrisis/D> fusion: pirate for music... 14:54 Holy cow that's a lot of work in not a lot of time 14:55 < andrewdpirate/D> It is 14:55 < idcrisis/D> that's pirate for work... 14:55 I joined late, sorry, but is there a structure for if / how we manage membership and how the coalition can break up? 14:56 (also hello again everyone, I've been gone for a long time) 14:56 <~alexjago> thesunnyk: yep, see CAP-1 14:56 <~alexjago> thesunnyk: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Pirate_Emergency_Congress_2021/Constitutional_Amendments#CAP-1:_Describe_an_.22electoral_coalition.22_and_relocate_the_additional_membership_types 14:56 Thank you 14:57 <~alexjago> if we want to get other people to use our system, it needs lots of work :D 14:58 +1 Andrew. Glad this is how it works. 14:58 < zach__/D> Do we have approx. member count for each party? 14:59 Also: I guess I'm still a Pirate Party member (and pay dues to PPAU) instead of Fusion? 14:59 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> We are the most tech aligned branch so chances are that fusion will rely on us to make working tech systems... 14:59 <~alexjago> thesunnyk: correct 14:59 noice. 14:59 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> depending on how centralised fusion ends up being* 14:59 <~alexjago> There's a lot to happen before that changes 15:00 <~alexjago> work needed on: https://github.com/ppau/piratedb 15:01 How do we ensure that the actual elected members (say it's a science party member) don't go completely off the rails? Are there any checks there? (Andrew is sort of answering this now) 15:02 <~alexjago> How do we ensure that an elected Pirate doesn't go off the rails? 15:02 Well, we can kick them out of PPAU 15:02 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> an elected pirate or an elected scientist or climateer etc 15:02 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> make sure they don't go directly against fusion agreed upon policies? 15:03 Ok that makes sense. IIUC this goes back to the idea that the members aren't actually disagreeing on anything (like factions) 15:04 < Gold/D> The buffering has gotten pretty bad for me now, so don't know if I'll stick around much longer 15:04 < Gold/D> The video buffering has gotten pretty bad for me now, so don't know if I'll stick around much longer (edited) 15:04 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> will there be a similar fusion pledge? not really as a legally binding function but as a kind of good faith thing... 15:04 < idcrisis/D> when there's a riff in the proceedings... 15:04 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> have you attempted lowering the fidelity or whatever? 15:05 < Gold/D> 144p currently 15:05 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> ah fair... 15:05 I guess I'm seeing the diffences Nationals and Liberals are having over climate policy 15:06 They have some pretty... antagonistic... laws about them not screwing each other? 15:06 <~alexjago> So according to the Agenda, we're due to finish now 15:06 < idcrisis/D> does it involve the word no? 15:07 < alexjago/D> **Procedural MOTION: Adjourn for the night** 15:07 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 15:07 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 15:07 < alexjago/D> Aye 15:07 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Can we maybe make a public calendar for when working groups will meet? 15:07 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Aye 15:07 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 15:07 Aye 15:07 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 15:07 < Satch/D> Aye 15:07 < Gold/D> Aye 15:07 aye 15:07 < zach__/D> aye 15:07 < Miles/D> aye 15:07 < mandrke/D> aye 15:07 < idcrisis/D> aye 15:07 < surprised/D> aye 15:08 < Satch/D> https://pirateparty.org.au/calendar/ 15:08 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> including working group meetings on short notice would be a necessity... 15:08 < Justine123/D> aye 15:08 < Miles/D> https://pirateparty.org.au/calendar/ 15:09 < idcrisis/D> i second that... 15:10 < zach__/D> Thats a nice calender, plenty of features 15:10 < alexjago/D> that's time - motion carried unanimously by the looks of it 15:10 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> So maybe setting up lines of communication between working group 'leaders' and people who control the calendar to get working group dates on there as well as including a call to action in national council meetings to check the calendar if you want to get involved sporadically. 15:11 < idcrisis/D> cheers...that's pirate for cheerios... 15:12 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> More than willig to volunteer... almost always available... just don't know when things are happening or what or where... or how or why to finish the w's 15:12 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> catcha! 15:12 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> Aargh! 15:13 < Satch/D> @Miles Times and links for this evenings meetings? 15:13 < Miles/D> im sending it out in a sec 15:13 < Miles/D> ive focussing on organising the livestream and congress 15:15 < Star_Tube-(James)/D> remember to like share and subscribe the stream before you leave of course 😉 15:40 -!- jedb [~u@2un2f5r8nsers.PirateIRC] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 16:28 -!- jedb [~u@sv75xzuctyuhi.PirateIRC] has joined #ppau-congress --- Day changed Sun Nov 21 2021 08:15 < Miles/D> good morning everyone 08:16 < Miles/D> do we have a @JohnA today? 08:22 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> mornign 08:22 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> ign 08:22 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> ing 08:24 < Miles/D> ing-ing-ing 08:25 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> I need coffee 08:32 < JohnA/D> Yes, just about to have another shower - should be back for 10am. 08:33 [Users #ppau-congress] 08:33 [~alexjago] [ gry-] [ MikaelaSuomalainen] [ Pingerfowder] 08:33 [@RelayBot] [ jedb] [ Nick_            ] [ thesunnyk   ] 08:33 -!- Irssi: #ppau-congress: Total of 8 nicks [2 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 6 normal] 08:34 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> 30 min shower? damn 08:45 < Miles/D> @alexjago @Satch @Darcrider @Dread Pirate Roger id like you guys to say a few words today 08:45 < Miles/D> can you all start hopping on stream 08:51 < Satch/D> link? 08:51 <~alexjago> same as yesterday 08:51 < Satch/D> I was just on the youtube stream yesterday 08:51 < Miles/D> yes 🙂 08:52 < Miles/D> but today is preselection which is important 08:55 < Satch/D> Can you shoot me the link please? 08:57 < Miles/D> done 08:58 < alexjago/D> New day, new stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdVbeGYpyYA 09:01 < JohnA/D> If you want me on, you'll have to give me the link too. 09:03 < Miles/D> Good morning <@&358404846354825216> ! we are resuming shortly, stream is currently sitting on the splash screen 09:07 < andrewdpirate/D> You appeared for a moment then went away 09:07 < JayStephens/D> yeah - a burst of audio & video then gone 09:09 < Miles/D> we're just waiting for the last people 09:09 < andrewdpirate/D> There was Miles of video 09:14 < andrewdpirate/D> Norway 09:16 <~alexjago> Point of order: technically nominations need to be seconded. Having worked with everyone who's nominating today it will be my pleasure to second their nominations. 09:19 < andrewdpirate/D> Yea 09:22 < idcrisis/D> 1.0025% interest of a million is $30/- a day free for life... 09:31 < idcrisis/D> 1.095% interest of a million is $30/- a day free for life... (edited) 09:32 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/Pirate_Emergency_Congress_2021/Nominations 09:32 < idcrisis/D> What music do you listen to? 09:33 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> Prog metal ... yes! 09:34 <~alexjago> **MOTION: ___** 09:34 <~alexjago> :ballot_box: Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 09:34 <~alexjago> whoops 09:34 <~alexjago> HOLD 09:34 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Approve all four candidates en banc** 09:34 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 09:34 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 09:34 < Miles/D> aye 09:34 < Satch/D> Aye 09:34 < Dr-Liam/D> Aye 09:34 < mandrke/D> aye 09:34 < JayStephens/D> aye 09:34 < alexjago/D> Aye 09:34 < JohnA/D> aye 09:35 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 09:35 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 09:35 < idcrisis/D> Aye 09:35 < the-fred/D> aye 09:35 < BrandonS/D> Aye 09:35 < twisty/D> aye 09:35 < andrewdpirate/D> I liked the maniacal laugh in the background for the null motion. 09:36 < idcrisis/D> "en banc" seems unrelated to "en masse" phew! 09:38 < alexjago/D> Motion CARRIED unanimously, thank you all 09:42 < alexjago/D> **MOTION: Close this Congress** 09:42 < alexjago/D> 🗳️ Please vote “Aye” or “Nay” in this text chat. 09:42 < alexjago/D> ⏰ Voting closes in two minutes 09:42 < alexjago/D> Aye 09:42 < Miles/D> aye 09:42 < JohnA/D> aye 09:42 < BrandonS/D> Aye 09:42 < Satch/D> Aye 09:42 < mandrke/D> aye 09:42 < idcrisis/D> aye 09:42 < the-fred/D> aye 09:43 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> aye 09:43 < andrewdpirate/D> aye 09:43 < twisty/D> aye 09:43 < JayStephens/D> aye 09:45 < alexjago/D> Motion CARRIED, thank you all 09:45 < idcrisis/D> it's pronounced "sayreious"! 09:45 < Dread-Pirate-Roger/D> thanks all 10:46 < justine-wilkinson123/D> Hey Guys - No video - the utube link is just the logo. It says Day 2.... Can you send me the link again someone. 11:36 < Miles/D> Post congress voting will start sometime in the next few days 11:36 < Miles/D> We'll also set these channels to slumber until next congress --- Log closed Sun Nov 21 11:59:13 2021