Strypey (Quitter.se refugee) is a user on mastodon.nzoss.nz. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.

I'm in Strasbourg, lobbying hard. Updates soon, but was able to talk to Axel Voss, the main guy behind the current (bad) versions of #Art11 and #Art13. Doing my best to #SaveYourInternet.

Lessons from today:
- Pro-Art11/Art13 MEPs do not know how copyright law works (no surprises there, the copyright law is a mess!)
- Wikimedia Commons is a very good example of a service that could suffer very much.
- As during #ACTA, MEPs are not entirely against sitting down and discussing the issues.

@rysiek

I'd love to have proper discussions with MEP's, but all these actions feel so very rushed rushed. Everytime I hear about it, it's we need action -now- and soon it's too late.

That's neither a modus of working or of cooperation.

@webmind that's true, but Wikimedia, EDRi and others were working behind the scenes all of this time. The information was there. Look at Julia Reda's blog and the dates of blogposts about this.

It's just that people seem to start caring when it's very close to a very bad outcome. It's hard to galvanize people unless shit is *looming*.

@rysiek @webmind bad shit is being planned all the time. Everyone can't work on all of it. Effective organizing requires presenting the most crucial information in the simplest and clearest possible way, so you can galvanize enough people, at the critical times when it will make a difference to the outcome.

@strypey

@rysiek

You also wear people out I think like this. I don't want to critisise edri and the likes. What I want is more transparant government.

To me this feels exhausting

@webmind @strypey @rysiek

Most importantly, don’t burn yourselves out.

I‘m still mad about SOPA/PIPA/CETA/ACTA/NSA/the police state/... and I feel shit is being thrown at us and we’re collectively not moving in the right direction as a species and that’s terrible. And yet life goes on somehow.

@ente @webmind @strypey and yes, burnout is a huge problem. But poretty much unsolvable unless "our side" starts having enough resources to manage such campaigns not as emergencies...

@rysiek
If only we had popular organizations with big budgets that let people make it their job to participate in the political process and fight for us.
@ente @webmind @strypey

@webmind @pesco @rysiek @ente @strypey
I bet many people wouldn't mind a government that does completely nothing.
A feature freeze of sorts.
No new law.
Everything keeps working as it was before.

Yeah, I know it wouldn't work long-term. But so often it seems that every time someone proposes a change to the law, someone takes it as an opportunity to inject their shitty article into it.

@Wolf480pl
I actually think there should be a "deterministic 'NO' party" whose program is literally to vote against *any* change to the status quo. A default to choose if every other party seems terrible, a force to to make the others have to be not terrible.
@webmind @rysiek @ente @strypey

@pesco @Wolf480pl @webmind @ente @strypey you're describing the conservative parties. That's where the name comes from.

And they're usually the worst. Blocking marriage equality, gender equality regulations, environmental regulations, etc etc.

Even in #saveyourinternet it's aout *preserving old business models* in the age of Internets. So conservatives are often the ones who are voting for #Art11 #Art13, by and large.

@rysiek @pesco @webmind @ente @strypey

This is not what he's describing.

It's not about preserving the overall status quo, it's about paralyzing the parliment.
Therefore, the proposed party must vote "NO" in all circumstances.

@Wolf480pl @pesco @webmind @ente @strypey yes, but *by definition* this preserves old regulation. Like marriage inequality, like freedom to polute. There is literally no good reason to have a party like that. This will no achieve anything.

What we need are parties that vote sane. Not obstructionists.

@rysiek @pesco @webmind @ente @strypey

It will change the game.

The basic idea behind democracy is that to rule, a party needs support of the society.
Currently there's an anomaly that if the society doesn't support any party, then some party still gets to rule, even though the society doesn't support it.

What I propose is that if the society doesn't support any party, then NOBODY gets to rule.

This will change the incentives for parties, because they'll have to be better than nothing.

@Wolf480pl @pesco @webmind @ente @strypey what will change the incentives is changing the electoral system to Single Transferrable Vote:
youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiy

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_t

Instead of coming up with hare-brained schemes involving obstructionism and blockchain, perhaps we should first do some research into actually viable solutions?..

@rysiek @pesco @webmind @ente @strypey

I wasn't serious with the blockchain part. Sorry if that made you angry.

I know about STV, but it's pretty complicated, It'd be a big change to the electorial system, and would the whole thing harder to understand. OTOH, a "NO" party is simple, and doesn't require changes in the electorial system.

I'm not saying it'd solve all problems, or most of the problems. I'm just saying it's an idea worth investigating.

@Wolf480pl @rysiek @pesco @webmind @ente
> "I know about STV, but it's pretty complicated"

I've voted in STV elections for local govt back home, it really isn't that complicated. People who can't be bothered thinking it through still have the option of treating it like a FPP election, and just putting (1) next to their preferred candidate instead of a tick. You could even have a rule that a tick counts as a (1) for that candidate in case people get confused.

Strypey (Quitter.se refugee) @strypey

@Wolf480pl @rysiek @pesco @webmind @ente the *huge* advantage though, is that I can vote for the green candidates, which still giving my vote to the safer social democrat candidates if the green candidates don't get it. If I was a right-libertarian, I could do the same but giving highest preference to any right-lib candidates, to make sure I wasn't splitting the vote and helping the socially conservative candidates get in.