Choose your preferred three discussion topics for Congress!


(Daniel Judge ) #1

We’ll likely have some time to cover some discussion topics this year, so please pick three from the list below and reply with your chosen topics, or if you think there’s something we really should be discussing, please suggest it!

This informal poll will close on Friday so we can finalise the agenda prior to Congress.

  1. How to be more engaging in the real world with local meetings, etc
  2. What does “non-commercial” actually mean?
  • We do not have a full understanding of what we mean by “non-commercial” in the context of copyright. Is the Pirate Bay a commercial copyright infringer? What about Mega and other filelockers? How involved does a service provider need to be in order for it to be a commercial copyright infringer?
  1. The Pirate Party’s position on G20
  2. The Pirate Party’s position on becoming a republic
  • Does Australia need to abolish the monarchy? Is the monarchy still relevant? Is our current system appropriate? What changes would need to be made? What sort of republic would we would support?
  1. International Cooperation between Pirate Parties
  2. Freedom of speech: are there acceptable limits?
  • The right to reputation, the right to privacy, restrictions on the use of confidential information, illegality and national security concerns all limit freedom of speech. Just what are the acceptable limits and how can we define them, if at all?
  1. The “why” of Pirate Party Australia
  2. To encrypt or not to encrypt? That is the question
  • When is it appropriate to encrypt communications? When is it appropriate to be open and transparent?
  1. Civil liberties in the virtual world: how do we ensure our rights when there’s no physical intrusion? etc the philosophy of digital rights

(Brendan Molloy) pinned #2

(Geoffrey Clark) #3

Personally, I’d like to see/hear more discussion on 2, 7 and 6, in that order of preference.
Each of the other topics would no doubt make for interesting and useful conversation however, so I’m happy with “basically anything.”


(Rebecca) #4

Only three?! :frowning: If I have to choose:

6 - Freedom of speech
7 - The “why” of Pirate Party Australia
9 - Civil liberties in the virtual world

6 and 9 are topics that I am personally very interested in (and I’m sure most PPAU members feel the same way).

I’ve enjoyed reading the commentary on 7 from Frew and others - it would be interesting to hear more people’s thoughts on this at Congress.

(sidenote: discourse handles out-of-order numbered lists very strangely!)


(Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer) #5

Depending on time limits, it might be more. Three was the minimum set, but we might take it up to six if we have the time :slight_smile: Just trying to gauge popularity of topics.


(Chris Bennetts) #6

9, 6, and 4. Others are justifying 9 and 6, so I’ll just make a case for 4. I think there’s fertile ground for talking about enhancing the constitution to strengthen our democratic system (and cut the archaic monarchy).


(Brett Wilson) #7

6,7 and 9 seem the most appropriate.


(tjal) #8

7, 6 and 9 for me…

9 seems to be quite the sticking point with e.g. Snowden’s leaks. I think the (relative) lack of public outrage is due to the fact that most people don’t seem to be able to relate to digital privacy intrusions in the way they might if e.g. surveillance equipment was being physically installed in their homes. It’s a new idea without direct precedent.

I think that this is a false dichotomy. Processes should be transparent, conversations should be secure and public when appropriate to serve the process. Encryption is just one tool you can use for this.


(Brendan Molloy) #9

I would note they aren’t presented as a dichotomy, they are separate questions related to the parent topic. :stuck_out_tongue:


(Mark) #10

I’m keenest on 6, 7 & 9. Honourable mentions for 4 & 1.


(Jack Coulter) #11

My preferences (descending priority):

6, 9, 8, 5, 1, 7, 2, 3, 4


(Andrew Downing) #12

I choose topics 1, 7 and 9.


(David Kennedy) #13

(in order of preference)

6 - Freedom of speech: are there acceptable limits?
The right to reputation, the right to privacy, restrictions on the use of confidential information, illegality and national security concerns all limit freedom of speech. Just what are the acceptable limits and how can we define them, if at all?
(it’s impossible to legislate freedom; only to promote the rights of some by constraining the liberty of others)

1 - How to be more engaging in the real world with local meetings, etc
(this is an area we struggle with; very pertinent)

9 - Civil liberties in the virtual world: how do we ensure our rights when there’s no physical intrusion? etc the philosophy of digital rights

7, 2 & 5 could also be interesting!


(Arik Baratz) #14

6, 7, 9 seem a bit more on point than the rest.


(David Boxall) #15

In descending order: 7, 1, 6, 9, 2 (first, what does “commercial” really mean?), 5, 8, 3, 4


(Sammy B) #16

7, 9 and 4 please :slight_smile:


(Steven) #17
  • The Pirate Party’s position on becoming a republic
  • Freedom of speech: are there acceptable limits?
  • To encrypt or not to encrypt? That is the question

(Datakid23) #18

6, 9, 4

Personally I think the Republic is worth talking about - if all the effort goes into replacing one archaic system with another equally as archaic, and undoubtedly flawed and compromised, then what’s the point of changing at all? Save the money, and the head space.


(alex) #19

Here is mine list of preferences in descending order:
8,6,9 - 5,1,7,2,3,4


(Wendy Ms Gator) #20

1, 5 and 7. We need to lift our profile.