National Meeting Log 20090506

Meeting Log This page contains a transcript or log of a meeting that occurred on 6th of May 2009. It should be used for reference only and does not need to be edited.

[Users #PPAu]
[&Brendan ] [@Ycros  ] [+Davidg7732] [+lovek323   ] 
[&Roderick] [%K`Tetch] [+Hiroki    ] [+stephenlark] 
::: Irssi: #PPAu: Total of 8 nicks [2 ops, 1 halfops, 4 voices, 1 normal]
20:22 <+Davidg7732> Hello everyone.
20:22 <+lovek323> g'day
20:22 <&Brendan> welcome back, btw :P
20:22 <&Brendan> I am so freaking tired
20:23 <&Brendan> how about you?
20:23 <+Davidg7732> Same. I've been working on my PhD almost non stop since around 10am today.
20:24 <&Brendan> PhD on what/
20:24 <&Brendan> ?*
20:24 <+Davidg7732> Environmental Science. Just started
20:24 <+lovek323> I'm fairly hungry. (Contributing to the conversation as usual.)
20:24 <&Brendan> oh cool
20:24 <+lovek323> Where are you studing?
20:24 <+Davidg7732> It involves using supercomputers to model the currents in the Great Australian Bight. I'm studying at Flinders Uni.
20:25 <&Brendan> oh awesome
20:25 <+Davidg7732> The GAB is the ocean just south of South Australia BTW.
20:25 <&Brendan> supercomputers, like an EeePC xD
::: Pseudomocha has joined #PPAu
20:25 <&Brendan> hi Pseudomocha 
20:25 <+lovek323> cool
20:25 <+Davidg7732> How about yourself, why are you tired?
::: mode/#PPAu [+v Pseudomocha] by Brendan
20:25 <+Pseudomocha> hey Brendan 
20:25 <&Brendan> i don't sleep much, that's my excuse
20:26 <+Pseudomocha> i slept for 12 hours last night
20:26 <&Roderick> evening everyone
20:26 <&Brendan> hey Roderick 
20:26 <+Davidg7732> Evening.
20:26 <+lovek323> Good evening.
20:26 <+Pseudomocha> hi Roderick 
[Users #PPAu]
[&Brendan ] [@Ycros  ] [+Davidg7732] [+lovek323   ] [+stephenlark] 
[&Roderick] [%K`Tetch] [+Hiroki    ] [+Pseudomocha] 
::: Irssi: #PPAu: Total of 9 nicks [2 ops, 1 halfops, 5 voices, 1 normal]
20:27 <&Brendan> how did Ycros get ops o.o
::: mode/#PPAu [-o Ycros] by Brendan
[Users #PPAu]
[&Brendan ] [%K`Tetch   ] [+Hiroki  ] [+Pseudomocha] [ Ycros] 
[&Roderick] [+Davidg7732] [+lovek323] [+stephenlark] 
::: Irssi: #PPAu: Total of 9 nicks [1 ops, 1 halfops, 5 voices, 2 normal]
20:27 >> Ycros<< Brendan: Roderick gave them to me
20:27 <&Brendan> hmm
20:27 < Ycros> :P
::: mode/#PPAu [+o Ycros] by Brendan
20:27 <&Brendan> halfop doesnt work today
20:27 <&Brendan> that's crap.
20:27 <@Ycros> take that
20:27 <&Brendan> indeed.
20:27 <@Ycros> :P
20:27 <&Brendan> I am undone.
20:28 >>> Brendan harikaris
20:28 >>> Pseudomocha giggles
20:28 <&Brendan> ..
20:28 <+Pseudomocha> what
20:28 <&Brendan> lol.
20:29 <&Brendan> two more minutes
20:29 <+lovek323> Oh no. I forgot about the time difference. Now I have no time to get food.
20:30 <&Roderick> SA, right lovek323?
20:30 <+lovek323> Yeah.
20:30 <+Davidg7732> I'm intending to eat during the meeting, so don't be embarrased.
20:30 <&Roderick> same :P
20:30 <+Davidg7732> I'm in SA too.
20:30 <+lovek323> I have to go to a shop to get food, though. :p
20:31 <+lovek323> Yeah, only the coolest people live in SA.
20:31 <+Pseudomocha> vic here
20:31 <&Roderick> ok, i guess we can get underway?
::: fraggature has joined #PPAu
20:31 <&Brendan> almost
20:31 <&Brendan> give me a minute
20:31 <&Brendan> lol
20:31 <&Brendan> computer issues
20:32 <&Roderick> haha, we'll wait for the latecomers
20:32 <&Brendan> hi fraggature 
20:32 <&Brendan> bah why does the computer not boot now!
20:32 <+Hiroki> I don't think I've left since I came in here last time.
20:32 < fraggature> hey]
20:32 <&Brendan> indeed you have not
::: mode/#PPAu [+v fraggature] by Brendan
[Users #PPAu]
[&Brendan ] [@Ycros  ] [+Davidg7732] [+Hiroki  ] [+Pseudomocha] 
[&Roderick] [%K`Tetch] [+fraggature] [+lovek323] [+stephenlark] 
::: Irssi: #PPAu: Total of 10 nicks [2 ops, 1 halfops, 6 voices, 1 normal]
20:33 <+fraggature> I hate me computer at the moment >.>
20:33 <&Brendan> I bought a new one
20:33 <&Brendan> and they lost my order
20:33 <&Brendan> I was mighty pissed.
20:34 <+lovek323> I imagine you were.
20:34 <+fraggature> lol
::: Topic for #PPAu: Pirate Party Australia :: https://pirateparty.org.au :: Meeting on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 20:30 AEST - add things you'd like to discuss to the agenda: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Meeting_Agenda
::: Topic set by Ycros [Tue May  5 02:42:38 2009]
20:35 <+fraggature> mine decided to make itself unactivated, I no longer have the key and have 4 days to fix the issue
20:35 <&Brendan> ... pirate one? lol.
20:35 <+fraggature> not only that but I cannot rearm the grace period
20:35 <+lovek323> Just download the Windows 7 RC. Then you'll have a year before you have the problem again.
20:35 <+Davidg7732> Sounds like you are using vista
20:35 <&Brendan> Vista is horrible
20:35 <&Brendan> use a hackintosh.
20:35 <+fraggature> problem with RC is I have to do a fresh install once the RTM comes out
20:35 <&Brendan> fraggature: by the time it comes out, you'd have to anyway
20:36 <&Brendan> it's Windows.
20:36 <+lovek323> Yeah. Can be quite annoying.
20:36 <&Roderick> ok, we can get things underway. like i said, the agenda is really just a guide, so this is all going to be a bit town hall-esque atm.
20:36 <+fraggature> plus dling an OS on 64kbps? not even I am crazy enough to do that
20:36 <@Ycros> fraggature: once you lose the activation, it's pretty hard to get it back
20:36 <@Ycros> aye
20:36 <&Roderick> but i've had a few people contact me about wanting roles to be assigned, wanting to know who to talk to regarding certain roles
20:37 <&Roderick> so far they've been to do with the website, and with promotion, so with respect to that, we have to decide who to appoint, and what is going to happen with respect to them.
20:37 <@Ycros> yep
20:37 <+lovek323> Whom do we have in a general leadership role?
20:38 <&Brendan> Roderick.
20:38 <&Roderick> well, i guess i have a sort of co-ordinator role atm.
::: Topic for #PPAu: Pirate Party Australia :: https://pirateparty.org.au :: Meeting on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 20:30 AEST - add things you'd like to discuss to the agenda: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Meeting_Agenda
::: Topic set by Ycros [Tue May  5 02:42:38 2009]
20:38 <@Ycros> Roderick-by-default
20:38 <@Ycros> has anyone asked Roderick? :P
20:38 <&Brendan> and I kinda spam links that people should read.
20:39 <&Roderick> but that said, if as time passes, and someone better and more able comes along, that'll be decided by the majority.
20:39 <+lovek323> Sounds good to me.
20:39 <+Pseudomocha> aye
20:39 <+Davidg7732> I'm happy with that.
20:39 <&Roderick> atm, its just trying to co-ordinate who wants to do what, give them access to what they need, to do that etc
20:40 <+lovek323> And chairing meetings.
20:40 <+Davidg7732> That sounds like a general leadership role.
20:40 <&Roderick> so is there anyone in particular that wants to assume some sort of responsibility over the site and its development.
20:40 <&Brendan> I know that Bond said he does
20:40 <&Roderick> ?
20:40 <+fraggature> I'd like a moderation role, even just a small one
20:41 <&Brendan> Ycros: you?
20:41 <+Davidg7732> I also could act as a moderator, but I don't have a lot of time so I couldn't do it by myself.
20:42 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: possibly
20:42 <@Ycros> I can lend some development time if something needs to be done in that area
20:42 <&Brendan> I already do moderation somewhat, but the forums are rather stagnant right now
20:42 <&Brendan> and iirc, we do have a mailing list
20:42 <&Brendan> on the piratpartiet.se server
20:42 <&Roderick> how about if i give bond, Brendan and Ycros access, and you guys can go from there?
20:42 <+Davidg7732> I was thinking more of a forum moderator, for when things liven up.
20:43 <&Roderick> and have free reign?
20:43 <&Brendan> Roderick: sounds good
20:43 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: indeed
20:43 <@Ycros> we have a mailing list as well?
20:43 <&Brendan> yeah, I think so
20:43 <@Ycros> forums vs mailing list? should we have both?
20:43 <&Brendan> wasn't my idea
20:43 <&Brendan> but I think the current forums are rathre annoying
20:44 <&Roderick> I think Bluebie wanted to be involved with it too, so if you guys want to discuss what you want to do with her, that'd be sweet.
20:44 <+Pseudomocha> I wouldn't have known about this meeting without the mailing list
20:44 <&Brendan> Pseudomocha: that's not the mailing list
20:44 <&Brendan> that's the crm
20:44 <+Pseudomocha> lolk
20:44 <&Roderick> yeah, the mailinglist is on the swedish server I think
20:44 <+lovek323> I quite like mailing lists.
20:44 <&Brendan> Roderick: I wouldn't mind assisting with coordination however
20:44 <&Brendan> and I could post regular links to useful articles on the main page
20:45 <&Brendan> I have a lot of time on my hands, lol
20:45 <&Brendan> I however do not have the expertise in the area of web programming with PHP, Perl, Ruby, etc 
20:45 <&Brendan> so that's where Ycros, Bond, etc come in
20:46 <&Roderick> haha ok, well, however you guys choose to proceed with the site is up to you, anyone with ideas I'll refer to you three.
20:46 <&Brendan> my language is Python :P
20:46 <+Davidg7732> If you need any programming help, I may be able to assist as long as the project is not too time consuming.
20:46 <+lovek323> I can program, but I'm more interested in working on promotion/policy development.
20:46 <+Davidg7732> I'm mainly involved with languages such as Fortan, C, Java, etc but know quite a bit of HTML.
20:46 <&Brendan> lovek323: indeed, that comes after this discussion
20:46 <&Roderick> and the guy who got in contact with me re: promotions wanted to be involved, his name is frank. he wanted to have a discussion with those going to be involved with the site.
20:46 <+lovek323> Yes.
20:46 <&Roderick> i'll refer him to you three also.
20:47 <&Brendan> Roderick: good good.
20:47 <&Roderick> ok, are there any other roles we should be worrying about at the moment?
20:47 <&Brendan> well, do you plan on having a long-term hiatus again?
20:47 <&Brendan> :P
20:47 <&Brendan> it was lonely in here for 3 months
20:48 <@Ycros> Roderick: thinking about roles is a good idea
20:48 <@Ycros> this is part of what we're actually going to do as well
20:48 <&Roderick> yeah, this goes to party structure too.
20:48 <+Davidg7732> We could use a designer, someone to come up with posters, etc.
20:48 <&Brendan> well, what is the AEC's policy regarding required party positions?
20:49 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: indeed
20:49 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: good question. I started reading their handbook last night, but I didn't get all the way through it
20:49 <+lovek323> Perhaps we can get someone to investigate this.
20:49 <&Brendan> Ycros: perhaps this will be reserved for the next meeting then
20:49 <&Brendan> indeed
20:49 <&Roderick> many ways to structure it, but i'm thinking about in terms of just operating.
20:49 <+Davidg7732> I think this summarises it.
20:49 <+Davidg7732> http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/Party_Registration/Handbook/roles.htm
20:49 <&Brendan> more official plans for future roles should be discussed in a future meeting, I think
20:49 <@Ycros> Roderick: well what do we need to do
20:50 <&Roderick> ok, aec requirements will be an issue for next meeting then.
20:50 <+lovek323> Yes, at this point, I don't think we need to be concerned with roles required by AEC.
20:50 <+Davidg7732> agreed
20:50 <@Ycros> the way I see it, is our two main goals are: 1) a decent policy/where we stand on various issues 2) promotion
20:50 <+fraggature> yeah
20:50 <+lovek323> Agreed.
::: Topic for #PPAu: Pirate Party Australia :: https://pirateparty.org.au :: Meeting on Wednesday, 6 May 2009 20:30 AEST - add things you'd like to discuss to the agenda: https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Meeting_Agenda
::: Topic set by Ycros [Tue May  5 02:42:38 2009]
20:50 <+Hiroki> Indeed.
20:51 <@Ycros> maybe working out what sort of activism we can do/get involved with
::: Brendan changed the topic of #PPAu to: Pirate Party Australia :: https://pirateparty.org.au :: Party Policy
20:51 <&Roderick> ok then, which brings that to point 4. issues outside the party scope.
20:51 <&Roderick> that requires we define the scope first, and then determine what we do with issues outside that scope.
20:51 <&Brendan> well, as discussed for a while yesterday, issues regarding our stance on censorship were brought up
20:51 <+lovek323> Not necessarily. We can define a policy regarding issues outside the scope without defining a scope.
20:51 <&Brendan> heh, yes, define the scope.
20:52 <&Brendan> well, I see it as a pyramid
20:52 <&Brendan> a primary goal, with subgoals
20:52 <+lovek323> What are the goals of the IPP?
20:52 <+fraggature> defining the scope first would be a good idea
20:52 <&Brendan> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Initial_Draft_Policy
20:53 <&Brendan> I believe the primary goal of the Pirate Party is Free Culture through Copyright Reform
20:53 >>+lovek323<< Brendan: I agree.
20:53 <&Brendan> but
20:53 <+fraggature> Sounds good
20:53 <&Brendan> Free culture can't be achieved through just that
20:54 <&Brendan> so, we reform copyright, yay we can share stuff
20:54 <&Brendan> but if it's censored by the governmnet
20:54 <&Brendan> we can only share freely what they tell us we can
20:54 <&Brendan> this is why I think that anti-censorship policies are a must
20:54 <&Roderick> yep, i agree, i can't see how anti-censorship can be eliminated from the policy platform.
20:55 <+Davidg7732> agreed. I think that is the top of the pyrymid
20:55 >>+lovek323<< Brendan: I don't agree. I think that censorship is a side issue. For example, I have no real issue with government censorship which is done well (i.e., with transparency, in a democratic way).
20:55 <&Brendan> lovek323: that's not the censorship I'm talking about
20:55 <&Brendan> disallowing R18+ games for example
20:55 <&Brendan> the internet filter
20:56 <&Brendan> non-transparent bureaucratic bulltwaddle.
20:56 <+fraggature> The internet filter must go
20:56 <+Davidg7732> Agreed
20:56 <+lovek323> If the people of Australia determine that R18+ games ought not to be available, then the government has a responsibility to make them unavailable.
20:56 <&Brendan> lovek323: when has anyone actually been asked?
20:56 <+Davidg7732> R18+ games are a side issue in my opinion however
20:56 <+lovek323> I agree that the current proposed Internet filter is a bad thing, but I am yet to be convinced of its central importance to copyright reform.
20:56 <&Roderick> no, that is the government playing nanny to the people. that is denying choice for those that are adult enough to make their own decision.
20:57 <&Brendan> lovek323: it has nothing to do with copyright reform
20:57 <@Ycros> they were going to change the stance on R18+ games, but one state governor disagreed and they require a unanimous agreement
20:57 <&Brendan> it has to do with free culture
20:57 <+lovek323> Which is what the government does when it says marijuana should be illegal, etc.
20:57 <&Brendan> lovek323: banning marijuana doesnt ban discussions
20:57 <&Brendan> or halt the spread of information
20:58 <+lovek323> Neither does the Internet filter.
20:58 <+Davidg7732> I think the filter is important because of the way the law could be corrupted, eg blacklisting sites about abortion.
20:58 <&Brendan> how can you say that for sure?
20:58 <+lovek323> Anyway, I'm side tracking the discussion. The central issue is the promotion of free culture?
20:58 <&Brendan> it's all so opaque
20:58 <&Roderick> i don't think its a case of will or won't, it is when.
20:58 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: exactly
20:58 <&Brendan> it's blocking non-illegal content
20:58 <&Brendan> currently
20:58 <&Brendan> and in the future, it could have further blocks
20:58 <+lovek323> So you would have no problem if it blocked only illegal content?
20:58 <+Davidg7732> That is my #1 point
20:58 <&Brendan> that we have no way of being aware of
20:59 <&Brendan> lovek323: oh no, I would still be angry
20:59 <@Ycros> who watches the censors? who do they answer to?
20:59 <+Davidg7732> <lovek323> - I would have almost no problems then. I would be annoyed, but not annoyed enough to protest against it like I have done previously
20:59 <+lovek323> The people. I believe in that transparent and democratically determined censorship would be acceptable to me.
21:00 <+fraggature> the AMCA, they answer only to the Government
21:00 <+Davidg7732> Perhaps we should define 'democratically determined censorship'
21:00 <&Brendan> indeed.
21:00 <+lovek323> But yeah, I agree that the current proposed Internet filter inhibits the free spread of culture.
21:01 <+lovek323> Well, it's not really a very good phrase, but I basically mean that there should be a board which takes submissions from Australians and the whole process is democratic (with board members voting) and transparent (with a detailed list of which sites and why).
21:01 <&Brendan> right
21:02 <&Brendan> lovek323: but why
21:02 <&Brendan> have you considered that you don't have to go to said websites?
21:02 <&Roderick> with the current climate which includes treaties like ACTA being drafted, and the IFPI calling for ISP responsibility for 'piracy' the filter will be used to restrict access to those sites too.
21:02 <+lovek323> Why have censorship?
21:02 <&Brendan> that the websites wont disappear because you hide them?
21:02 <+Davidg7732> answer: child porn
21:02 <&Brendan> that if you DO want to see it, it's extremely easy to get around
21:02 <+lovek323> Our society is censored in a number of ways already. I don't see any reason this shouldn't be extended to the Internet.
21:03 <&Brendan> be warned, Australia strongly supports the ACTA treaty
21:03 <&Brendan> based on the drafts from Wikileaks
21:03 <&Brendan> lovek323: I think that society should be less censored in general
21:03 <+fraggature> same here
21:03 <&Brendan> I understand classifications for television
21:03 <&Brendan> as you dont have control over what is displayed at what time
21:03 <&Brendan> the internet is not the same beast
21:03 <&Brendan> you choose where you go
21:03 <+lovek323> That is a valid point of view, but this is something I would need to think about more before I agree with you.
21:03 <&Brendan> it doesn't come to you
21:04 <+lovek323> You also choose to go to pornographic book stores. Should they be able to sell videos containing child pornography?
21:04 <&Brendan> 14 year olds are binge drinking, let's raise the age limit to 21, says the news
21:04 <&Brendan> wait a minute, 14 year olds, raising the limit will help how?
21:04 <+Davidg7732> good point <lovek323>
21:04 <&Brendan> lovek323: I'm not saying they should
21:04 <&Brendan> but just shutting the door doesnt make it go away lovek323 
21:04 <&Roderick> only the filter is not about child pornography. its not a child pornography filter. it's an 'illegal or unwanted content' filter.
21:04 <&Brendan> you just go through the window
21:05 <+lovek323> Roderick: Therein lies the problem, I suppose.
21:05 <&Brendan> I am not against blocking child porn
21:05 <&Brendan> that's not censorship per se
21:05 <&Brendan> that's defending the law
21:05 <&Brendan> blocking anti-abortion sites isn't.
21:05 <+lovek323> We agree, then, I believe.
21:05 <+lovek323> I don't agree with blocking content people are legally allowed to view.
21:05 <+Davidg7732> not against the law 'yet' anyway
21:06 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: it's illegal to link to the pages on the blacklist
21:06 <&Roderick> People can censor their own internet connection if they want.
21:06 <&Brendan> yet you dont know what the blacklist is
21:06 <&Brendan> it's a stupid system
21:07 <&Brendan> alright
21:07 <+lovek323> I wouldn't mind having someone draft a position paper for us on this, as then it is something which can be better discussed.
21:07 <&Brendan> that would be interesting indeed.
21:07 <@Ycros> does internet content have an R18+ rating in australia?
21:08 <@Ycros> how can a classification board "rate" internet content?
21:08 <&Brendan> not yet apparently
21:08 <+lovek323> I don't believe that Internet content is rated at this point. I could be wrong.
21:08 <&Roderick> it's impossible to rate it all.
21:08 <&Brendan> lovek323: teh ACMA wants the power to block all restricted and refused classification material
21:08 <@Ycros> Roderick: that's kind of my point
21:08 <&Brendan> that's MA15+ upwards
21:08 <&Roderick> just confirming ;)
21:08 <+lovek323> I would have no problem with an agency which rates Internet sites, but I would have a problem with sites requiring a rating.
21:09 >>+lovek323<< Brendan: Yeah, that is outrageous.
21:09 <@Ycros> Roderick: and yet we rate books, movies, games, and any movie, book, game that isn't rated is technically illegal
21:09 <&Brendan> Ycros: no
21:09 <&Brendan> illegal to sell
21:09 <&Brendan> not to possess
21:09 <&Brendan> usually.
21:09 <+fraggature> rating the internet is like asking 1 man to count the world's population
21:09 <&Brendan> there's plenty of banned books in Australia
21:09 <&Brendan> because some prude didn't like the use of cunt on page 21
21:09 <&Brendan> and other absurd reasons
21:09 <&Brendan> they're still sold
21:09 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: hmm, I'm not sure about that, what would customs do if they found you importing it?
21:09 <&Brendan> Ycros: that's not the same thing
21:10 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: how do you get it into australia then
21:10 <&Brendan> Ycros: that's not up to me
21:10 <&Brendan> importing, possessing and retailing
21:10 <&Brendan> not the same thing
21:10 <&Brendan> I'm simply talking about the possession
21:10 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: how do you get it into possession in the first place
21:10 <+Davidg7732> Thats an interesting issue. What do we think about the censorship of books.
21:10 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: rather outrageous
21:11 <&Brendan> once again, it isn't forced upon you
21:11 <&Brendan> so it shouldn't be censored
21:11 <&Brendan> classified yes, not censored
21:11 <+Davidg7732> Take hentai for example, should it be classified child porn if it involves drawings of naked children?
21:11 <&Brendan> I believe warning should be placed on explicit books
21:11 <&Brendan> warnings*
21:11 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: now that is VERY grey area there
21:11 <+fraggature> I hate the idea, it is forcefully witheld information, in a sense
21:12 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: classifications provide warnings, that's partially why they exist
21:12 <&Brendan> indeed
21:12 <&Brendan> but they stop
21:12 <@Ycros> primarily rather
21:12 <&Brendan> they are restricted at a point
::: Quinny has joined #PPAu
21:12 <&Brendan> refused classification shouldn't exist
::: mode/#PPAu [+v Quinny] by Brendan
[Users #PPAu]
[&Brendan ] [@Ycros  ] [+Davidg7732] [+Hiroki  ] [+Pseudomocha] [+stephenlark] 
[&Roderick] [%K`Tetch] [+fraggature] [+lovek323] [+Quinny     ] 
::: Irssi: #PPAu: Total of 11 nicks [2 ops, 1 halfops, 7 voices, 1 normal]
21:12 <+lovek323> I've gotta get going, but would anyone mind if I put some thoughts together (perhaps putting them on the wiki) so that we have something to argue from regarding this issue?
21:13 <&Brendan> I already have
21:13 <&Brendan> I'll save it once the meeting ends
::: Quinny has quit -> Quit: http://www.mibbit.com ajax IRC Client
21:13 <&Brendan> and the logs will be posted.
21:13 <+lovek323> Excellent.
21:13 <+lovek323> Good bye, everybody.
21:13 <&Roderick> Look forward to reading it lovek323
21:13 <@Ycros> see, I think the internet has shown us what a world without classifications and censorship looks like
21:13 <+Davidg7732> See you later.
21:13 <&Brendan> Ycros: it's a rather good thing
21:14 <&Brendan> in my opinion, anyway
21:14 <&Brendan> myspace is not a good thing however
21:14 <&Brendan> :P
21:14 <@Ycros> you don't have to use it
21:14 <&Brendan> exactly
21:14 <&Brendan> I didnt say ban myspace
21:14 <&Brendan> :P
21:15 <&Brendan> A moment, just for clarification
21:15 <&Brendan> was it decided that the main focus of the party should be Free Culture?
21:15 <@Ycros> isn't that what it leads to?
21:15 <&Brendan> indeed
21:15 <+Davidg7732> I don't think it was, but I'd be happy to go with that.
21:15 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: what did you think it was?
21:16 <&Roderick> https://pirateparty.org.au/wiki/index.php?title=Pirate_Manifesto#Core_Issues_and_Requirements_of_a_Pirate_Party not binding of course.
21:16 <&Roderick> but i think, a good guide.
21:16 <+Davidg7732> one moment, I'd like to review what was said for a second
21:16 <&Brendan> Roderick: I didnt say primary policies
21:16 <&Brendan> I said primary focus
21:16 <&Brendan> the greater goal
21:17 <@Ycros> as in, copyright reform is what we want to do, but the reasons why we want to do it are more important
21:17 <&Brendan> inded
21:17 <&Brendan> indeed*
21:17 <@Ycros> copyright/patent reform
21:17 <&Brendan> which is why I stated that I believe the focus should be Free Culture, and the policies determining this are to be decided
21:18 <+Davidg7732> We were talking about Free culture and then the discussion went on to censorship. Perhaps our core issue could be 'Free culture through censorship reform'? (worded better though)
21:18 <&Brendan> such as copyright reform, patent reform, anti-censorship, etc
21:18 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: but that is still focusing on a pathway to the focus
21:18 <@Ycros> Davidg7732: censorship is just one issue that some of us believe to have an impact on free culture
21:18 <+Davidg7732> <Ycros> that seems to summarize my opinion well.
21:18 <&Brendan> there's multiple milestones to free culture
::: lovek323 has quit -> Ping timeout
21:19 <+Davidg7732> I think I understand what you are saying.
21:19 <@Ycros> also listed on the wiki are privacy rights
21:19 <&Brendan> I think that's more of a subpolicy though
21:21 <&Brendan> now, let us discuss the policies once again for a moment
21:21 <&Brendan> so we can move on :)
21:21 <@Ycros> Roderick: the CC survey got me thinking, it was really well done and thought provoking. I wonder if it would be useful to conduct surveys, and find out what people's concerns and issues are
21:21 <&Brendan> Is it agreed that the party should have a main policy regarding copyright reform?
21:21 <+fraggature> yes
21:21 <&Roderick> well privacy fundamental to liberty.
21:21 <+Davidg7732> yes
21:21 <&Brendan> please, for a moment, can we stay on topic Ycros and Roderick, :P
21:21 <&Roderick> thats a good idea Ycros
21:21 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: sorry :P
21:21 <&Brendan> I want to close this portion
21:22 <&Brendan> is it agreed we require a main policy regarding copyright reform?
21:22 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: copyright reform is obviously the main thing the party is about, and indeed where the concept of pirate parties has come from
21:22 <+stephenlark> yes
21:22 <&Brendan> Yes, I agree. It's simply for the record :P. is it agreed that we require a main policy regarding patent reform, whether it be software patents or pharmaceutical patents?
21:23 <&Brendan> or other patents, too
21:23 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: patents come into it in a big way
21:23 <@Ycros> in essence we're talking about intellectual property as a whole
21:23 <&Brendan> yes, I know
21:23 <+Davidg7732> I think our policy on patent reform should be different from out policy on copyright reform
21:23 <@Ycros> which encompasses both copyright and patents
21:23 <&Roderick> ok, I for one think there is a general consensus that free culture is more than just copyright reform can be agreed upon - what exactly is within that scope, people still want to debate, but can we agree that those things contained within the initial draft policy are within that scope?
21:23 <+Davidg7732> as patents cover things such as medicines
21:24 <&Brendan> Roderick: that's what I'm covering now
21:24 <@Ycros> Davidg7732: that is indeed true
21:24 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: yes, obviously must be different 
21:24 <&Brendan> and now, is it agreed that the party should take an anti-censorship stances as a main policy?
21:24 <&Brendan> I am not defining how anti-censorship
21:25 <&Brendan> just saying not swaying towards pro- or agnosticism
21:25 <&Roderick> i think aye.
21:25 <@Ycros> I think anti-censorship is another important component of this
[Users #PPAu]
[&Brendan ] [@Ycros  ] [+Davidg7732] [+Hiroki     ] [+stephenlark] 
[&Roderick] [%K`Tetch] [+fraggature] [+Pseudomocha] 
::: Irssi: #PPAu: Total of 9 nicks [2 ops, 1 halfops, 5 voices, 1 normal]
21:25 <&Brendan> Hiroki, Pseudomocha, stephenlark: any opinions regarding the previous few questions?
21:26 <&Brendan> input helps :)
21:26 <+Davidg7732> <Brendan> I am unsure about this. Anti-censorship is another important component of this, but we did agree that some censorship may be acceptable.
21:26 <+Hiroki> Eehhh.... let me read.
21:26 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: as I said, I'm not defining the scope now
21:26 <&Brendan> I'm stating that we simply have a goal of some form of anti-censorship
21:26 <&Brendan> to at least defend our own right to information
21:26 <+Davidg7732> Then I agree.
21:26 <+Hiroki> Yes, of course it should be a goal.
21:26 >>+Pseudomocha<< Brendan, i also agree
21:26 <+stephenlark> agreed on anti-censorship stance
21:27 <&Brendan> now, DRM is on the wiki
21:27 <&Brendan> what do you think about DRM?
21:27 <@Ycros> I think "anti-censorship" is a bad thing to call it. Instead, we should simply have a stance on censorship in our policy
21:27 <@Ycros> DRM is part of copyright enforcement
21:27 <&Brendan> Ycros: yes, but I was stating that it in a manner that makes explicit that we are not pro-censorship :P
21:27 <+Hiroki> DRM is fine in itself, but I think people are strangling it.
21:27 <@Ycros> that comes under copyright reform
21:27 <&Brendan> Ycros: indeed, but it has a stance fully against DRM
21:27 <&Brendan> there are situations where DRM works rather well
21:28 <&Brendan> example, Steam
21:28 <&Brendan> from Valve Corporation.
21:28 <&Brendan> they don't use over-restrictive DRM
21:28 <+Pseudomocha> yes. it does work quite well.
21:28 <+Davidg7732> Some forms of DRM are perfectly acceptable to me (steam). Others a just really annoying, (SecuROM)
21:28 <&Roderick> there shouldn't be any law making it's circumvention illegal.
21:28 <&Brendan> and iirc, Steam stated that if they ever close, that your games will still work
21:28 <&Brendan> and I believe that was part of the EULA
21:28 <&Brendan> don't hold me to that though
21:29 <&Brendan> Roderick: indeed
21:29 <&Brendan> I agree with that
21:29 <+Davidg7732> I will not buy anything with SecuROM, but I don't feel strongly enough against it to protest against it. Why should DRM be part of our parties policy?
21:29 <+Davidg7732> <Roderick> agreed
21:29 <@Ycros> Roderick: I agree with you. I think with copyright reform DRM becomes irrelevant.
21:30 <&Brendan> Ycros: not necessarily
21:30 <&Brendan> should it become legal to circumvent it, publishers would probably not accept this
21:30 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: then they won't accept the copyright reform
21:30 <&Brendan> and do everything in their power to stop you from circumventing their protection
21:31 <&Brendan> oh no, they can accept it
21:31 <&Brendan> they can just bug the shit out of you
21:31 <@Ycros> as I said, DRM only enforces copyright, we're changing what copyright means
21:31 <&Brendan> I wasn't, I was simply discussing DRM and our opinions about it
21:32 <+Davidg7732> This is an interesting take on the subject that I have not though about.
21:32 <+Davidg7732>  Has there been any legal cases of people being charged with circumventing DRM of say a movie that they themselves legally own?
21:32 <&Roderick> I think there should be some sort of legal imposition on them to inform the consumer that their product contains prohibitive DRM on it etc
21:32 <&Brendan> Roderick: like an ingredients section on food
21:32 <&Brendan> "This DVD is infected with SecuROM."
21:32 <+Davidg7732> There kind of is now, eg *Internet connection required to activate
21:33 <+Davidg7732> *For computer games that is
21:34 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: look, my opinion is that DRM is a core part of copyright reform
21:34 <&Brendan> so should DRM be included within the copyright reform policy?
21:34 <&Brendan> or be added as a subpolicy?
21:34 <@Ycros> you can't talk about copyright reform without touching on DRM
21:34 <&Brendan> or dropped entirely?
21:34 <&Roderick> exactly, it's integral to any discussion about copyright.
21:34 <+Davidg7732> <Ycros> I don't understand what you mean.
21:34 <+stephenlark> agreed on DRM
21:34 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: DRM is copyright enforcement
21:35 <@Ycros> Davidg7732: as I said before, DRM is a tool which is used to enforce copyright
21:35 <&Brendan> its primary goal is to hinder reproduction of the product
21:35 <+Davidg7732> It is a tool of copyright enforcement
21:35 <@Ycros> so if you're talking about copyright
21:35 <&Brendan> legally or otherwise
21:35 <@Ycros> you have to touch on DRM at some point
21:35 <&Brendan> The wiki will state that an agreement that DRM must be discussed within the copyright reform policy
21:36 <+Davidg7732> Yes. But bittorent is a tool sometimes used to spread copyrighted material. Is it related to copyright as well?
21:36 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: it is simply a protocol
21:36 <+Davidg7732> <Brendan> I'm happy to accept this.
21:36 <&Roderick> DRM has legislation backing its enforcement though.
21:36 <&Brendan> I'm sure gopher can be used for piracy too
21:37 <@Ycros> bittorrent is used in mass copyright infringement around the world, yes I think it's relevant to the discussion
21:37 <&Roderick> technological protection measures are illegal to circumvent, except for a few exceptions.
21:37 <&Brendan> Ycros: I don't think discussing a specific protocol is useful
21:37 <&Brendan> the policies need to be technology-neutral
21:37 <&Brendan> unless legislated against
21:37 >>@Ycros<< Brendan: no, but discussing current issues is
21:37 <+Davidg7732> <Brendan> That is what I was trying to say.
21:38 <&Brendan> example, a policy against DRM is useful because there is legislation regarding circumvention of it
21:38 <@Ycros> we have to be ready to answer people's questions on those matters
21:38 <&Brendan> Ycros: we can be, doesn't have to be part of the policy using the words "BitTorrent"
21:38 <@Ycros> mmm, yeah.
21:38 <@Ycros> not as part of the policy really
21:38 <&Brendan> we can discuss mediums of transfer
21:38 <&Brendan> that's what I mean by protocol agnostic
21:38 <&Brendan> and technology neutral
21:40 <&Brendan> I don't honestly see the true relevance of bittorrent regarding the context of copyright reform though
21:40 <&Brendan> if copyright is reformed in a manner that allows non-commercial distribution
21:40 <&Roderick> ok, not wanting to railroad anything, but i think we've reached a some consensus that DRM is relevant, and we should have some sort of policy on it?
21:40 <&Brendan> then the protocol becomes irrelevant
21:40 <+Davidg7732> I was just using it s an example. I don't think it has a relevance.
21:41 <&Brendan> Roderick: it should be iwthin the copyright reform policy.
21:41 <+Davidg7732> <Brendan> You convinced me. Agreed.
21:41 <&Brendan> is it agreed that all the policies should be technology neutral?
21:41 <+stephenlark> agreed
21:41 <&Brendan> let me rephrase
21:41 <+Davidg7732> <Brendan> agreed again.
21:41 <&Brendan> slightly
21:42 <&Brendan> discussion about DRM can't be technology neutral per se
21:42 <&Brendan> as it's one central focus 
21:42 <&Brendan> but regarding non-legislated policies
21:42 <&Brendan> things that we arent fighting against
21:42 <&Brendan> they should be technology neutral
21:42 <&Roderick> yep, agree. generally speaking that should be a guide with our policies.
21:43 <+Davidg7732> <Brendan> Why the distinction between things hat we arent fighting against?
21:43 <+Davidg7732> What if our policy changes in the future?
21:44 <&Brendan> what I'm saying is that things that don't HAVE to be specifically against one thing, shouldn't be
21:44 <&Brendan> especially the example of the distribution
21:44 <&Brendan> discussing one protocol would be moot
21:44 <+Davidg7732> Ok. I understand.
21:44 <&Brendan> but here comes something harder
21:44 <&Brendan> what about physical distribution
21:45 <+Davidg7732> Agreed.
21:45 <&Brendan> physical non-commercial distribution
21:45 <&Brendan> on CDs, DVDs, BluRay, helium balloons coated with magnets, etc
21:45 <&Brendan> this is also what I meant by technology neutral
21:46 <&Brendan> I believe any distribution format should be legal, should it be for non-commercial purposes
21:46 <+fraggature> are you being serious about the baloons?
21:46 <&Brendan> fraggature: it was a joke, regarding future technologies we don't know about
21:46 <&Brendan> :P
21:47 <+fraggature> I was thinking "wtf, why didn't anyone tell me about this new technology"
21:47 <&Brendan> I still remember pirating Portal, played it, loved it, bought it.
21:47 <&Brendan> Bought it for my friend.
21:47 <&Brendan> Bought it for my girlfriend.
21:47 <+Hiroki> The thing with physical non-distribution is that you either aren't duplicating it, or you pay money of some sort to create the item (buy DVDs, etc)
21:47 <&Brendan> same goes for World of Goo
21:48 <&Brendan> Hiroki: huh?
21:48 <&Brendan> purchasing the medium to copy it isn't distributing commerically
21:48 <&Brendan> you had to buy a hard drive to store your music on
21:48 <+Hiroki> That's true
21:49 <+Hiroki> But people see it differently if there's more "time" consumed into something.
21:49 <&Brendan> explain
21:49 <+Hiroki> It's easier for us to just transfer a song online than to burn it to a disc and mail it.
21:50 <&Brendan> depends on what part of the bush you live in
21:50 <+fraggature> he doesn't
21:50 <+fraggature> I'm the bush boy
21:50 <&Brendan> and I find the sneakernet to be faster for transfering 100GB than ADSL2+
21:50 <&Brendan> 10GB a minute
21:51 <&Brendan> to walk three doors up
21:51 <&Brendan> and copy it onto his computer
21:51 <+Davidg7732> Does ease of use matter? Someone robbing a bank may have a harder time than someone robbing a newspaper vendor. Both are still illegal.
21:51 <+Hiroki> Both with different penalties.
21:51 <+Hiroki> But that;s beside the point....
21:51 <&Brendan> downloading a song is a civil offense
21:51 <&Brendan> armed robbery is not
21:52 <+Davidg7732> Ok, Sorry. I was a little off topic there. 
21:52 <+fraggature> theft takes something, copyright infringement makes a copy and gives the copy to someone
21:52 <+Hiroki> But it takes the opportunity for that receiver to buy it, see.
21:52 <&Brendan> "I wouldn't steal a car, but if my friend called me up on the phone and said he could make a copy of one for me, why would I say no?"
21:53 <&Brendan> horrible misquote of a comedian
21:53 <&Roderick> yeah, that is a distinction you have to constantly remind yourself about, intellectual 'property' is a bit of a misnomer.
21:53 <&Roderick> you can't 'steal' copyright.
21:53 <+Davidg7732> <Hiroki> They can always buy it later
21:53 <&Brendan> as I stated before, I do that
21:53 <+Hiroki> Yes, and that's where people miss the point.
21:53 <&Brendan> but I cant buy Sonata Arctica CDs
21:53 <&Brendan> anywhere near where I live
21:54 <&Brendan> or Ayreon
21:54 <+stephenlark> gotta go folks...
21:54 <&Brendan> good bye stephenlark :)
21:54 <+Hiroki> Someone might download a cam of a movie, and go watch it in the cinemas. It's what normally happens.
21:54 <+Davidg7732> see you.
21:54 <+Hiroki> Same thing with songs, really.
21:54 <+fraggature> shops out my way only stock crap music, I have never seen a metal album for sale
21:54 <+Hiroki> Bye.
21:54 <&Brendan> I know people who buy DVDs, then download the rip
21:54 <&Roderick> should we agree on a time for the next meeting then?
21:54 <&Brendan> because they cant rip them themselves
21:54 <&Brendan> because they lack the expertise
::: stephenlark has quit -> Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.84 [Firefox 3.0.10/2009042315]
21:55 <&Roderick> what day/time is better for others?
21:55 <&Brendan> Roderick: not yet
21:55 <&Brendan> 5 minutes.
21:55 <+Davidg7732> <Roderick> People seem to be leaving, so soon
::: Kocsonya has joined #PPAu
21:55 <&Roderick> oh, not wanting to stop the meeting, just want to get some feedback on a better time for people before they leave.
21:55 <+Hiroki> I think we need to look at piracy as a way of previewing something before you go out and buy it.
21:55 <+Hiroki> Sometimes you might, and sometimes you may not.
21:56 <+Hiroki> Test-driving a car isn't stealing.
21:56 <&Brendan> ok, so the scope has currently been defined as Free Culture, with policies regarding copyright and patent reform, and a stance against overbearing censorship.
21:56 <&Brendan> Any comments?
21:56 <+Hiroki> Sounds good.
21:56 <&Roderick> thats the general gist as i understand it.
21:56 <+Davidg7732> Aye
21:57 <&Brendan> I have recorded this
21:57 < Kocsonya> I jooined a but late, it might have been already discussed, but how much do we follow the manifesto of the Swedish PP?
21:57 <&Roderick> will you be posting it up Brendan ?
21:57 <&Brendan> Roderick: indeed
21:57 <&Brendan> on the wiki
21:58 <&Brendan> and the irc logs too
21:58 <+Hiroki> You post the entire log?
21:58 <&Brendan> I will.
21:59 <&Roderick> Kocsonya, I don't think it will be all that different, however I think we may differ on certain points.
21:59 <&Brendan> Roderick: and the manner in which we go about it
21:59 <&Brendan> different system, different policies
21:59 <+Davidg7732> I think the wiki says it best. It "should be adapted to meet our own end, as we are not obligated to agree on all points, or with its current form."
21:59 <&Roderick> Yep.
21:59 <&Brendan> I think we should officially prepare to wrap this meeting up guys
22:00 <+fraggature> ok then
22:00 <&Brendan> I think the next meeting should start an hour earlier
22:00 <&Brendan> allow further time for discussion
22:00 <&Roderick> Ok, any particular date?
22:00 <+Davidg7732> Agreed, but not too much any earlier.
22:00 <+Hiroki> I think we were discussing about moving it to Thursday?
22:00 <&Brendan> Davidg7732: 7.30pm AEST
22:01 <&Brendan> next week, Wednesday or Thursday I think would be best
22:01 <+Davidg7732> I am unavailable Mondays and Tuesdays late, but any other day 7.30pm AEST is fine.
22:01 <&Brendan> probably Thursday
22:01 <+Pseudomocha> fine with me
22:01 <&Roderick> 7.30 on a thursday will be tight for me, I may be somewhat late.
22:01 <&Brendan> Roderick: I think I can hold the keep :P
22:01 <&Brendan> how late is late?
22:02 <&Roderick> but thats ok, Brendan or Ycros are just as able :P
22:02 <+fraggature> Thursday sounds excellent
22:02 <&Roderick> if not more.
22:02 <&Roderick> maybe 20-30 minutes.
22:02 <&Brendan> ah that's fine
22:02 <&Roderick> yeah. for next week, i'll have a look at the aec requirements, and do a walkthrough on the wiki.
22:02 <&Brendan> excellent
22:03 <+Hiroki> And I'll grow a week closer to being able to vote.
22:03 <&Brendan> haha
22:03 <&Brendan> Roderick: I'll add it to the agenda
22:03 <&Roderick> if you, Ycros and Bond can email me at [email protected], I'll email you all re: access.
22:03 <&Brendan> also, a more indepth discussion on censorship perhaps?
22:03 <&Roderick> and set you up with email accounts.
22:04 <&Roderick> ok, yeah, i think  our approach to the filter should be discussed.
::: Hiroki[m] has joined #PPAu
22:04 < Hiroki[m]> I just got BSOD'd
22:05 <@Ycros> Roderick: j
22:05 <@Ycros> k
22:05 <&Roderick> ouch.
22:05 <&Brendan> haha
22:05 <&Brendan> use a real OS ;)
22:05 < Hiroki[m]> I tried turning on the TV and bam
22:05 < Hiroki[m]> Meh. I wanted a mac but couldn't afford
22:06 <&Brendan> Hackintosh
22:06 <&Brendan> do it
::: Hiroki has quit -> Ping timeout
::: mode/#PPAu [+v Hiroki[m]] by Roderick
::: mode/#PPAu [+v Kocsonya] by Roderick
22:07 <+Hiroki[m]> I have to remember to set the boot location to my hard drive again
22:07 <+Hiroki[m]> Current it boots from USB 
22:07 <&Brendan> wait, before off topicness
22:07 <&Brendan> Thank you guys for attending this meeting.
::: Roderick changed the topic of #PPAu to: Pirate Party Australia :: https://pirateparty.org.au :: Party Policy :: Next meeting - 14 May (19:30) AEST 
22:07 <&Brendan> The next meeting will be next week, Thursday 14 May 
22:07 <&Brendan> damn you Roderick 
22:07 <&Brendan> steal my thunder.
22:07 <&Brendan> :P
22:08 <&Roderick> haha
22:08 <&Brendan> You may now return to your homes. 
22:08 <&Brendan> *end logging*
::: Roderick changed the topic of #PPAu to: Pirate Party Australia :: https://pirateparty.org.au :: Party Policy :: Next meeting - Thursday 14 May (19:30) AEST