Organisation talk:Syn2cat
m (→Comments) |
m (→Comments) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Article 3 - contradictory: "à condition que l'idéologie de celui-ci ne conteste les intérêts de l'association" - either we're neutral, or not, we can't be both at the same time. Political neutrality would also mean that we can't use the hackerspace as a platform for issues that mean a lot to us: privacy/data-retention, DRM etc. Of course, if you remove the last clause, various associations could well use the facilities of the hackerspace for these purposes (eg. C3L) --[[User:Tschew|Tschew]] 09:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC) | Article 3 - contradictory: "à condition que l'idéologie de celui-ci ne conteste les intérêts de l'association" - either we're neutral, or not, we can't be both at the same time. Political neutrality would also mean that we can't use the hackerspace as a platform for issues that mean a lot to us: privacy/data-retention, DRM etc. Of course, if you remove the last clause, various associations could well use the facilities of the hackerspace for these purposes (eg. C3L) --[[User:Tschew|Tschew]] 09:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| − | : Maybe the sentence is contradictory or badly written. But the idea behind this was to keep parties from claiming our activities. I.e. the left wing party from claiming that, if we're against surveillance, we must be left wing or the right wing from supporting their claims with our actions against.. whatever. That shouldn't mean that we can't act politically, if you understand politics as the act of operating in society, not of making policy or supporting party politics. --[[User:Kwisatz|kwisatz]] 10:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC) | + | : Maybe the sentence is contradictory or badly written. But the idea behind this was to keep parties from claiming our activities for their purpose. I.e. the left wing party from claiming that, if we're against surveillance, we must be left wing or the right wing from supporting their claims with our actions against.. whatever. That shouldn't mean that we can't act politically, if you understand politics as the act of operating in society, not of making policy or supporting party politics. --[[User:Kwisatz|kwisatz]] 10:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC) |
Article 10 - Separate votes for male and female representatives? How is this proposition justified? --[[User:Tschew|Tschew]] 09:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC) | Article 10 - Separate votes for male and female representatives? How is this proposition justified? --[[User:Tschew|Tschew]] 09:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
: To make absolutely sure that there's one speaker of each gender. If there was but one female candidate for the speaker position, she would be automatically elected. --[[User:Kwisatz|kwisatz]] 10:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC) | : To make absolutely sure that there's one speaker of each gender. If there was but one female candidate for the speaker position, she would be automatically elected. --[[User:Kwisatz|kwisatz]] 10:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 11:03, 15 December 2008
Members
Should we allow "personne physique" only or also "personne morale" ? The various associations would be a "personne morale" and their members would automatically be granted access to the hackerspace without paying an additional fee (See #Access to the Hackerspace). That would require the associations to pay a monthly or annual fee, depending on the number of their members and their level of involvement. --kwisatz 15:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Access to the Hackerspace
This might be more of an issue for the internal regulations... but how do we handle access to the hackerspace? This question is also linked to the fees somewhat. Other Hackerspaces have a monthly fee of €20 to €25. Do we charge associations if they want to hold a venue or not? --kwisatz 15:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Article 3 - contradictory: "à condition que l'idéologie de celui-ci ne conteste les intérêts de l'association" - either we're neutral, or not, we can't be both at the same time. Political neutrality would also mean that we can't use the hackerspace as a platform for issues that mean a lot to us: privacy/data-retention, DRM etc. Of course, if you remove the last clause, various associations could well use the facilities of the hackerspace for these purposes (eg. C3L) --Tschew 09:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe the sentence is contradictory or badly written. But the idea behind this was to keep parties from claiming our activities for their purpose. I.e. the left wing party from claiming that, if we're against surveillance, we must be left wing or the right wing from supporting their claims with our actions against.. whatever. That shouldn't mean that we can't act politically, if you understand politics as the act of operating in society, not of making policy or supporting party politics. --kwisatz 10:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Article 10 - Separate votes for male and female representatives? How is this proposition justified? --Tschew 09:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- To make absolutely sure that there's one speaker of each gender. If there was but one female candidate for the speaker position, she would be automatically elected. --kwisatz 10:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
