My third reason for stepping down is the effect of a small contingent of people who thought it was their inalienable constitutional democratic right to make me suffer for every single thing I did or didn’t do.
In one aspect, this comes with the job. It is normal for a party leader to take mockery and ridicule from supporters of other parties, as well as from hostile reporters, and be patient while re-explaining the issues, again and again. But these people were alleged supporters of the party, within the Pirate Party.
In military terms, being shot in the back like this is called blue fire. It used to be called friendly fire until somebody realized it wasn’t very friendly.
When you’re exposed to treatment like this, several times a day, every single day, from people you need to rely on, it changes your behavior. You stop planning forward and start watching your back. You stop being proactive and start becoming risk-averse. In more concrete terms, you stop looking forward to all the possible wonderful open paths for changing the world, and start worrying over which daggers are going to come from where today, and wonder when the pain will hit.
These people — which were a tiny, tiny minority contingent, it must be pointed out — would argue that it is part of democratic processes to criticize as they have done. Let me make clear beyond any shadow of a doubt that it is not and that it is harmful beyond imagination. For one thing, you just don’t give the person whose job it is to publicly convey trust in your movement — you don’t give that person a treatment designed to break down prisoners of war before an interrogation. Processes and bylaws be damned. You don’t give anybody on your team that kind of treatment, regardless of what you think of them.
I have seen other people exposed to this treatment peripherally in my career years. They usually break down in two to three months and then have to leave the work force for a couple of years, and never quite come back.
To make one thing clear: this treatment did not affect my decision to step down. However, the way it changed me did. My only defense was to stop listening to that kind of criticism and trust my inner compass and a few carefully selected people. As I knew I would be hit by a torrent of criticism for everything I did and didn’t do on every single day, starting with the fact that I went out of bed and at what time, it became impossible to sort relevant feedback from blue fire. I didn’t intend to break down; but instead I became shellshocked.
It could take many forms. A lot of it was public deliberate distortions of things I had said, turned into mockery. Some was plain made up. Overall, it was the kind of things you would expect to see from the competing team.
Most of the blue fire wasn’t public, though. Let me take one concrete example, where a member of the party board sent a long mail to my management team explaining basically what a horrible person I was, and in particular, how bad a manager this person thought I was.
Now, in order to see the gravity here: the party management team is the team of people that reports to the party leader. The party leader reports to the party board. So this was my boss (or one of them, at least) sending a scathing mail to the people who have me as their boss telling them what a horrible manager they thought I was.
If your boss led you in to your team one morning and started with such a tirade, adressed at your team, telling them how bad you were, how long would you stay at that job?
(Fortunately, people in my team responded quickly and defended me. But still.)
Things like this happened daily. Several times a day. For several years. It changed me into somebody I don’t want to be, and that — specifically that — is reason #3 I’m stepping down.
How would it have changed you?
That said, it was also the hardest leadership and management problem I’ve ever had. This contingent portrayed themselves as martyrs that weren’t allowed influence. Telling them to shut up would just have put more fuel on that fire and wouldn’t have worked. Ignoring them and rewarding people that did real work instead was the best recipe I could find. Just throwing them something to keep them quiet was never an option on the table — the worst thing you can do to an organization culture is to reward intriguemakers and backstabbers with what they want. That teaches everybody else that blue fire is the way to get ahead, and as a result, that behavior will spread and prosper. Creativity in the org grinds quickly to a halt when that happens.
Side note: I’ve been out for a couple days with something flulike. Hence the five-day gap in publication.
Hey Rick. Very interesting to read you reflections. Even though I haven’t walked in your shoes I do understand that it has been very tough for you being in the position you were in. However nobody can take away what you have accomplished. Just want to let you know that I and the rest of the activists in sollentuna have supported you all the way. Take care and good luck in your new position. Hope to see you soon over a beer!
First things first:
“small contingent of people”. If by small, you mean a large majority of the ACTIVE party members who frequent the forums, then I suppose your right.
Second: In general, when a person screws up on the job, said person gets reprimanded or even punished for his/her screw up. And you made several screw ups during your time as party leader, and as such was entitled to some reprimanding.
Third: Reading your articles since you stepped down as party leader, more and more it becomes clear to me that you must be a very paranoid person (both on and off duty as a political spokesperson). Everyone in the party (except a select few) must’ve had it in for you, wanting the worst to happen to you etc.
Lastly: Most people who screw up, get reprimanded for it, and in the best of cases, try to make the most of the situation and to strive to do better. Now granted, your mistakes while party leader were “few and far between”, the results of said mistakes was politely saying DISASTROUS. I firmly believe that your little screw up (legalized child pornography?!?) mere weeks before the general election in 2010, cost the party the election. In 4 years since the 2006 election, the Pirate Party did ZERO improvement in the election results. That is what is known as a catastrophic failure by the party leader and it’s leadership, and all members of said leadership should consider stepping down in favor of bringing in new talent, and a new direction to possibly steer the party to a future victory.
Addressing your last point first: 1) Where were you when the political program was written, and why didn’t you write it differently for me to read, since everybody was invited to do so?, and 2) thinking it would have “cost us our victory” is frankly delusional scapegoating. Check your numbers before and after. The “others” column in the polls was hovering at 0,9%-1,4% before that incident, as well. Yes, what happened was bad, but it was neither the result of one person nor a decisive factor.
As for the rest, they’re merely not true. “Large majority of the active members” is simply downright false, as evidenced by collected data. My impression is that it has been a core of about a dozen people, fueled by about four, with another maybe two dozen hangarounds. That’s very far from our 700 officers and thousands of activists.
It is true that somebody who makes mistakes can be reprimanded, but this is determined by their boss — the board — and not by people who think I am in the wrong just because I do things in ways they don’t like: that’s not for them to determine. And this was not a case of reprimanding, this was a case of shouting and drowning out all constructive discussion, all the time.
Also, it didn’t start in this election campaign. It started in 2008, which makes your point moot at best.
I have a rule on my blog: when you are a guest on my server, I expect you to behave like a guest in my house. If you are rude to me or to other guests, I will show you the way out. Normally, your comment would be bordering on deletion, but here, it is an excellent example of my point, so I choose to keep it for illustration.
There seems to be a misconception, in the minds of themselves, that one small circle of people who “frequent the forums” in any way are equivalent to active pirate members and/or evangelists.
They’re not.
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/12/everyone-and-no-one.html
“If by small, you mean a large majority of the ACTIVE party members who frequent the forums, then I suppose your right.”
It’s been years since I took the forum seriously (except the members meetings etc) because the only thing I see there is bickering, bickering, more bickering and, of course, massive trolling. My experience is also that if you want to discuss with the really active members (including Rick, Anna, CE, Infinite Emma and so on) the forum is the completely WRONG place because of said bickering and trolling.
So if you use the forum as some kind of indicator of what the active members (that is, the ones that actually deliver and don’t just have loud mouths) think about Rick I’d say that you could as well slaughter a goat under strict rituals and read the intestines.
That said I do agree that some of the critics against Rick are just and spot on, but most of the constructive critics just drowns under the uninitiated and unqualified allegations that sadly has become the norm, delivered by an inarticulate mob.
What we’ve lacked during all this time is a nuanced discussion and that lack is, as I see it, a problem at least in pair with some of Ricks less glorious moments of the past…
Hey M go fuck yourself !
Sounds like that sucks. Sometimes it become a meme to harass people. It’s very easy to complain all the time. ’cause you feel that you are active. In some ways you are active, but not in a good sence. I hope that they were not to much a pain in the ass.
It is a big difference between constructive criticism and constant whining and I am sad to say I saw a lot of the latter in PP during the election campaign last year. It is easy to put the blame for everything that goes wrong on one single person. To be successful we all need to work together and encourage each other. Constant whining is such a drag, a big de-motivator. I hope we all learn something from this and try to be more positive in the next campaigns.
I’ve seen this mindless complaing goin on in forums for a couple of years now and it’s very difficult to figure out what these people really want.
At times I’ve been wondering wether they are plants from the recording industry, there seems to be a lot of those about.
I hate you all backstabbers !
I am actually surprised that you held out so long in spite of the trolls and morons.
It was your job to deal with situations like these – that’s what leaders do. Do you think it’s different for Reinfeldt, Sahlin or any SEO of any random corporation? The answer is no, and your inability to deal with this issue just shows that you should have stepped down a couple of years ago, and it also shows why you should leave the partyâs board ASAP. You have shown that you have no interest whatsoever in the dull everyday work that is necessary, you simply forget what you are supposed to do in a heartbeat if given a miniscule chance to be quoted in an international newspaper.
“My impression is that it has been a core of about a dozen people, fueled by about four, with another maybe two dozen hangarounds.”
Are you joking, or are you blind? It wouldn’t have been a problem if the truth-teller where so few! Just look at the people you thanked in the post about stepdown reason #1. All of them – except maybe one or two – critizised you, but you don’t see it!
Now, this is just rude. You have no idea how much unseen and ungrateful work it has taken to keep things running. Just as with any startup — just look at any entrepreneur.
Believe it or not, but I did not intend to be rude. I did not say that you haven’t done a lot of dull and hard work, I simply repeted what you already said – that you have no interest in doing that. See “Stepdown reason #1: Stagnation”.
Thanks for an excellent post; it must be very difficult to write this without resorting to pure bitterness and hatred, and I’m genuinely impressed by the result.
This is perhaps a lesson to learn for all of us, not just the few you mention. And not just once, but over and over again.
It’s no excuse, but let’s just remember that anger and frustration has been the main driving force for many of us. Not all of us are good at directing this anger and frustration in a constructive way. Those of us who are not, need to learn – or to replace anger and frustration with determination and hope.
It’s all too easy to be harsh when upset, but in those cases it may be better to rest one’s case until one can be civil about it. (And you have always set a good example when it comes to being civil to others, whether they were civil themselves or not.)
And the real lesson is, of course, that the person on the other end deserves better, whoever it is; that’s actually kinda close to being a central point in our politics, so we of all people should be able to recognize that, right?
I hope I have not been unfair when I have criticized you, and if I have, I am honestly sorry.
I hope you’ll find the strength and will to continue as an international spokesman, I believe you’re a perfect match for that task.
I also think the job really needs to be done.
Good luck!
You are right, and you are wrong.
If I read this correctly, your point here is that you have been exposed to some really horrendous harrasment. Between the lines you seem to be saying that this is through no fault of your own.
It is not surprising that you try to put the blame on these people. But maybe you should consider the possibility that this critique did not come out of a wish to harm you. Maybe it came out of a wish to save this very good thing, a thing you were instrumental in bringing about but for the last couple of years have done more things to harm than make grow and prosper?
Maybe the critique came out of a fear that you were destroying this only chance to bring these oh so very important issues to the political table.
â…to criticize as they have done. Let me make clear beyond any shadow of a doubt that it is not and that it is harmful beyond imagination. â Would you rather have your co-workers and âbossesâ not tell you when you do something they perceive to be wrong or even harmful?
You have been treated, not as a human being, no, but as a very bad leader. To think that you would simply endure this and not be scarred is of course ludicrous. We all need to recieve feedback in a constructive manner and in a way that resonates with our sense of self, or it will all fall flat. It is obvious that some people have gone way too far, missed their mark and done you great harm. And that is sad. That this has impaired your ability to lead makes me very sad.
I’m sorry you have not been able to listen for so long, making some of those who cared both about you and the party trying harder and harder to make their point with you until it turned into harrasment. I’m sorry you have been blinded to the fact that you are not a good leader. I’m sorry you try to blame others for your failings. I do hope you are able to learn from this experience, and not make the same mistake next time if ever there is one.
I’m sorry you probably won’t be able to read this comment in the way it was intended as well. I hope you get to relax now, enough that one day you will.
You are probably right when you say that the critisism comes from a wish to save the pirat party and its ideas from Rick and his ideas, but what the backstabbers miss (and I’m sure they don’t see themselves as backstabbers) is that it is still not right to act as they have done.
“Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.” – Eleanor Roosevelt
Vi lever i en sportkultur dĂ€r varenda idiot har den demokratiska rĂ€tten att sitta pĂ„ lĂ€ktaren och högljutt tycka att matchcoachen Ă€r en klantskalle som leder hans favoritlag pĂ„ fel sĂ€tt. Inget fel med det, sĂ„ lĂ„ngt. Problemen uppstĂ„r nĂ€r alltför mĂ„nga av dessa idioter ocksĂ„ börjar tro att kritik utan konstruktiva alternativ Ă€r meningsfull…
Möjligen skulle man kunna organisera forum enligt fru Roosevelts citat ovan, sÄ att pappskallarna fick ett subforum att gnÀlla av sig i, medans vi som vill diskutera ideerna fÄr göra sÄ ostört.
Gratulerar, du har just kommit fram till varför politiken har en tendens att börja föras bakom lyckta dörrar, pÄ precis det sÀtt som wikileaks avslöjar.
“.. medans vi som vill diskutera ideerna.. ” _Vi_, som Ă€r bĂ€ttre Ă€n alla andra, Vi som Ă€r överlĂ€gsna.
Det Ă€r skillnad pĂ„ att stĂ€nga “dörrarna” för de som bara förstör, som inte ens försöker bidra med nĂ„got konstruktivt…
@Peter Andersson: Det hĂ€r handlar _inte_ om de som bara förstör, som inte ens försöker bidra med nĂ„got konstruktivt. Man kan nĂ€mligen inte bli “backstabbed” (svek) av folk man inte respekterar, den sorten har man aldrig nĂ„gra problem med att ignorera. Det Ă€r alltid den du litar pĂ„ allra mest, som har makten att sĂ„ra dig allra mest. AlltsĂ„, att lĂ„sa ut “idioter” behöver man inte göra ur perspektivet “friendly fire”, de var ju inte “friendly” till att börja med.
Diskutera idéer ostört. Det Àr vad man gör i privat kommunikation, inom en mycket liten grupp, tex. kring köksbordet eller dess elektroniska motsvarighet. Men gÄr man dÀrifrÄn till vad som kan börja kallas hemliga möten, dÄ har man passerat en mycket viktig grÀns i demokratiska perspektiv. Men, det Àr ingen skarp svartvit grÀns, grÄzonen Àr ganska stor.
Hi Rick.
you mentioned in one comment that this perceived blue fire started in 2008. Can you identify any specific event that triggered this maltreatment that you feel that you have experienced since that year?
Jag var alltid lojal. Att bli motarbetar har alltid dödat chefer. Stor respekt till dig för att du istÀllet för att dra med partiet, valde att avgÄ sÄ att nÀsta generation av ledare kan ge 100%.
Mvh Niclas B
Whining and ignoring ones own leaderships faults and major flaws is not good qualities in a political partyleader Rick. You should either have resigned years ago as leader or spoken out at that time, to cool things down. Having bad feelings in a party is not constructive. But truth is that you have run the Pirateparty in an almost dictatorial way which is contrary to what you preach so most of the blame unfortunately (for you) lies on you.
A Swedish party leader does not have to be perfect to lead his party into the parliament, he doesn’t even have to be intelligent and/or front a just cause – just look at Jimmy Ă kesson and the Sverigedemokraterna.
The difference between theirs and the Pirate Party’s organisation? They all rally behind Jimmy, at all times, for better or worse, and inside whiners public realtions underminers are being kicked out before they manage to do any harm to the group’s collective positive feeling of being on the right way (not that they are, but’s that another story).
So you think that SD is a good rolemodell for PP? Rick made some serious mistakes as a leader for PP and one of the worst is his lack of knowledge in how to delegate and by constantly setting himself above everybody else in PP.
@Hanna,
If that is how you genuinely have felt, why did you choose to remain active with the Pirate Party, and not Miljöpartiet or VÀnstern? Those two parties agree with us on our issues, and they could benefit a lot from getting more activists who know the issues.
Miljöpartiet and VÀnstern have both have party leaders that are not Rick Falkvinge, and they are organised in different ways from us.
How can you on the one hand say to Rick that he is “blinded to the fact that he is not a good leader”, and at the same time say that the party he created is “only chance to bring these oh so very important issues to the political table”?
I would be very interested to hear why you thought your time was more usefully spent criticising Rick from within the Pirate Party in the run-up to the election, than simply changing to another party that fights for the same ideas but with a different (and presumably less disatrous) party leader.
So… What you are basically saying is that PP is superfluous, that we all might as well vote for MP or V? Very interesting thing for an MEP to say… We don’t need PP because there are other parties that fight for the same thing – abandon PP instead of trying to make it better since there is no need for PP anyway?
Are you stepping down too?
Seriously you dont get what hes saying?
DanielS: Seriously – don’t you? Maybe you should stick to the Swedish language.
No, what Christian is saying is simply – “if you think our issues are important, but you don’t like our organisation, why don’t you work for the same issues in another organisation?”
That’s NOT demeaning the organisation, or stepping down.
How on earth did you get that weird idea?
And please – your patronizing comment to DanielS – that’s simply pathetic.
Stick to the issue, inead of mocking people on how they write.
Bad manners.
@Christian
I have never been particularly active within the party. Not that I haven’t wanted to in the past, but I have always come back to the fact that I would not be a good fit, especially after a run in with Mab a few years back, which he probably don’t remember. đ Nor have I ever expressed any interest in being active in VĂ€nstern or Miljöpartiet, I’m not sure why you would suggest I do that. I’ve limited my activism to donating as much money as I comfortably can. I would not say I’m an activist, though I suppose it’s flattering you think of me that way.
I did not spend much time at all critising Rick in the run-up to the election. The only person I have spent time critising is you, but that was well before the election hoopla got going.
I’m confused as to how you believe there is a contradiction between starting something important and after a few years not being a good leader fot that same thing. And why would you try to put the spotlight on me, this is a post about Rick is it not?
Hi Hanna
As you suggested I have no clue about what run in we’ve had in the past. But I would love to know if you care to share. Either here or privately. Regarding Christians remark I think he mistook you for Hanna Dönsberg, one of our candidates in the Swedish election last year (the fact that we have so few women in the party frequently leads to people thinking there can be only one woman with the same name in Piratpartiet đ )
And I would actually like to challenge this idea that Rick is such a bad leader.
I don’t think he is.
I can’t see anyone in this party who would have done a better job.
But the bickering and heavy critisizm bombardment culture that has been allowed to prosper for too long within the party has made Rick a bad leader, not just because he did wrong, but because it is absolutely impossible to be a good leader for a group who doesn’t want you as their leader.
Yes, critisizm is important in a dynamic organisation, but it can be done in a civil manner. I have seen many occasions within the party wherein different people have schemed, intrigued and back-stabbed different other people – not just Rick – and it is always a sorry sight.
The problem with Piratpartiet is that it is still such a young organisation, with a very low average age of heir members, which means that the lack of competence in dealing with organisational issues often come out as painfully obvious.
Hopefully, Piratpariet will come of age and mature with the years, so that it at some time in the future actually may deserve a place in the parliament.
At the end of the day, we all have to admit the sad fact that the main reason why Piratpartiet had such a bad election, and didn’t even get close to the parliament, is that we didn’t deserve it. We were not ready for it. We didn’t get the people’s trust, and that’s a fact. And we have to take that to our hearts – all of us, with humility and a desire to get better.
Don’t blame RIck.
Blaming Rick for the election result is actually quite childish and irresponsible.
Grow up, folks.
@CE
“If that is how you genuinely have felt, why did you choose to remain active with the Pirate Party, and not Miljöpartiet or VĂ€nstern?”
So what you say is essentially that since PP was founded by Rick, therefore PP more or less IS Rick and also will continue to be defined by Rick, his strengths and his weaknesses?
Now, THAT’S a very depressing thought. A party with over 16.000 members still being limited by it’s founders characteristics. I sincerely hope that you’re wrong and that the party has grown, and will continue to grow, to something bigger than any of it’s individual members (yes, even Emma!).
As Ive said before best way to kill a party like ours is to infiltrate it and sow bitternes and critic all day every day. Its very hard to find out and its very very effective. Plus they get a to see the inner workings of the party in question.
After reading your blogg for several years Ive noticed over time alot of names trolling and flamming. I can only imagine what we havent seen.
Kudos for a great job over many long years Rick! Even in the ups and downs. After all, we are human, and last I checked, its human to fail from time to time. Even if your a party leader. So again kudos for holding out for so long.
Flipping the Bozo Bit.
Thank’s for a very interesting blogpost. I will point out one thing I believe is important to reflect upon and learn from – the Bozo bit.
“My only defense was to STOP LISTENING to that kind of criticism and trust my inner compass and a few carefully selected people.”, “Telling them to shut up would just have put more fuel on that fire and wouldnât have worked. IGNORING THEM and rewarding people that did real work instead was the best recipe I could find.”
In Microsoft(?) management terms, ignoring a person is sometimes refered to as an antipattern called flipping the Bozo bit.
“It projects a very negative attitude which can and will get in the way of fostering whole-team communication and participation, and fosters an atmosphere of cattiness and rumor-mongering and back-stabbing”. In short – “doing this poisons team interactions”.
Here are some links I quoted above which describe the scenario when this happens in more details (and yes, it is very, very easy to fall into this trap. If you have worked with people you have done it):
http://breckyunits.com/dont_flip_the_bozo_bit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bozo_bit
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A4rskarteknik#Osynligg.C3.B6rande
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SetTheBozoBit
@Anders H
Thank you for this piece of information. I have long said that constant refusal to handle things that went wrong (because of “klart skepp” and such) and never admitting fault will only harm the person that made the mistake in the long run, and will prevent angry people from forgiving. The “Bozo bit”-theory points out another aspect of it.
Deciding a person is a troll will make him/her one, as you can never listen to that person again. Making a person a troll will make that person a troll to everyone else to. Make enough people trolls, and you have a party full of trolls and noone else will listen. Being a troll will probably not give you a warm and fuzzy feeling inside either…
This, in hindsight, is really bad. I hope we learn from this valuable lesson and never make that mistake again.
I also hope it is not to late to repair this. I know that some people left us (maybe for V and MP that Christian seems to suggest in his comment), but some are stubborn and still remain. These are really fine people and should be listened to.
And remember; listening does not necessarily mean obeying!
+1. That is all I can say. +1.
And I do realize that I’m probably considered a troll which is a little bit frustrating…
@Pia: “And I do realize that Iâm probably considered a troll which is a little bit frustrating⊔
I don’t know you, but only from reading your comments here that’s exactly what I concluded already. If you’re really frustrated about it how about contributing something more constructive… instead of… y’kno.. just trolling!?
Seems to me that you’ve done exactly this, “flipped the bozo-bit” on Rick. If that’s indeed the case, why do you even hang around here to keep “commenting”? Ah, I see.. trolling, as it were.
Thank you for your input!
IM going to miss you Rick, sharing is caring.
One more thing: Has anyone googled “blue fire”? Are we just going to accept something Rick invented as a fact once more?
It seems I shortened “blue-on-blue fire” somewhat, but introducing military concepts was not the main point of this post.
Pia: Did you feel that remark was relevant and constructive? Or possibly the kind of knitpicking faultfinding that brings people and trust down with no positive upside?
@pia “Has anyone googled âblue fireâ?”
Ah, and an ignorant troll at that.
Has anyone googled Pia=troll?
I actually like to play the red team. And I’m a self admitted troll.
Still, the trolls on ricks forum simply are not any fun. Sometimes I had to wonder how come one or two obvious trolls, obviously _not_ doing it for the lulz, as proper trolls do, could afford to spend so much time writing stupid commentary on a forum.
Either we really really are paying “creative artists” entirely to much money, and so they have to much time to spend protecting their monopoly instead or being creative. (If we had them starve they would probably write more…)
Or someone is paying them and it is their job to do what they do.
And then we have the internal trolls…
[…] till att han avgick pĂ„ sin blogg, och det finns en del att fundera över. Kommentarerna pĂ„ den hĂ€r posten Ă€r tĂ€mligen intressanta, tycker jag. Mest för att vi behöver ta med oss hur vi har gjort och […]
Jag tror inte att ni som i den hÀr trÄden gÄr pÄ ganska hÀtskt mot Rick riktigt förstÄr vad ni gör. Det Àr faktiskt en rÀtt otÀck ton i vissa kommentarer, och om det Àr samma personer bakom dessa kommentarer som de Rick syftar pÄ sÄ förstÄr jag den hÀr bloggpostningen mer Àn tidigare.
Hoppas det hÀr fullstÀndigt idiotiska och kontraproduktiva pÄhoppandet slutar nu.
Jag kan bara instĂ€mma, och konstaterar följande – man ser inte brödet nĂ€r man sitter i degen.
Om man Àr en del av en viss kultur, och inte har förmÄgan att se helheten lite uifrÄn, sÄ kommer förstÄs alla försök att analysera kulturen att falla platt till marken. DÀrför förstÄr inte de hÀr personerna som gnÀller och kritiserar att de Àr del i en destruktiv kultur, utan fortsÀtter med samma strategi.
Det blir helt enkelt för jobbigt att ifrÄgasÀtta sig sjÀlv.
I’m sorry to hear how some of the higher ranked party member have turned their back on you and reverting to slander. You did not deserve that and no one do.
Still, an organization needs a leader depending on where it is at. And you had the fire and geist needed to set this ship afloat. Sure, you had your shortcomings, but no one of us knew how to build a political party or to manage it. And we are all children in the beginning.
However, the party has evolved, and I suspect that the general needs to step down and a new kind of unifier is needed. So I believe that for the organisation sake, this is a good time to give the wheel to some one else. I am positive that we will have need of you elsewhere.
Still there are some things I want to address:
Someone made a comparison with SD. But as you and many leading pirates have said – PP and SD are each others opposites – where PP believes in freedom, SD wants control for instance. PPs path comes with a price – each chef knows how to make the best soup. Hence everyone wants they say-so. Further, it is much easier to complain and harass while on the internet than face-to-face.
Never the less, I wish you the best of luck!
It’s not a matter of “SD” in particular, it’s about a common foundation required by ANY and ALL organizations, be it a political party, a company, an institution or any team of any kind – it’s spelled Loyalty!
That PP is, and should be, a lot more “free”, flexible, transparent – is fine. Some of these properties also come with a price, of potentially more friction and sometimes clashes of many wills; but it does not implicate the “freedom” for everyone to wield the illoyalty dagger at any whim.
This kind of internal fragmentation and in-fighting is as productive as cancer, and can not be tolerated in any successful organization. Internal criticism is one (and very necessary) thing, but the kind of “OMG-I-Just-hate-the-boss!” whining seen frequently whenever Rick does/says ANYting is not!
Try pulling shit like that in ANY of the traditional parties, or by any commercial employer, and see where that’d land ya’! Not on the favor-bench, for sure. Don’t like the party leader? Fine, nominate and/or vote for a candidate of your own liking at the next opportunity. ’til then, STFU or GTFO.
Word!
On a side note, that looks a nazi soldier with an MP40. I’m not sure if you want to count those amongst the friendly forces.
Vi har en kultur i PP dĂ€r vem som helst fĂ„r sĂ€ga vad som helst om vem som helst – och det Ă€r pĂ„ det hela taget mer bra Ă€n dĂ„ligt – men det Ă€r inte detsamma som att partiledaren mĂ„ste agera pĂ„ allt eller ens lyssna pĂ„ allt och Ă€gna personlig uppmĂ€rksamhet Ă„t varenda medlem, för det Ă€r rent logiskt omöjligt.
Det gÄr 86400 sekunder pÄ ett dygn (24x60x60). Det betyder att Àven om partiledaren höll sig vaken dygnet runt och försökte ha kontakt med varenda medlem och hÄlla sig ajour med alla ideer sÄ skulle han/hon ÀndÄ bara hinna Àgna ungefÀr 2 sekunders uppmÀrksamhet Ät var och en.
Det finns en anledning till att stora organisationer mÄste ha hierarkier och den har ingenting med demokrati eller diktatur att göra, den Àr helt enkelt matematisk/logistisk.
Det förvĂ„nar mig ibland att alla dessa high tech-kunniga medlemmar i partiet saknar intuitiv förstĂ„else för den matematiska biten…
Vad gÀller SD som role model sÄ handlar det naturligtvis INTE om just det partiet per se, breddar man resonemanget till de fyra senaste partierna som tagit sig in i parlamentet sÄ ser man att uppslutning bakom en eller tvÄ ledare Àr vad som krÀvs. SD tog sig in genom att sluta upp bakom Jimmy. Mp tog sig in genom att sluta upp bakom sina tvÄ sprÄkrör. Ny demokrati tog sig in genom att sluta upp bakom Ian och Bert, trots att rörelsen i övrigt var den mest diversifierade som har setts i det hÀr landet. KD tog sig in genom rena personkulten bakom Alf Svensson, trots att de religiösa smÄförbunden i landet kan vara sÄ differentierade att missionsförbundare, frÀlsningarmesoldater, livetsordare och andra religionspundare pÄ vissa orter inte ens pratar med varandra.
Allt fokus mÄste vara pÄ att komma in i riksdagen, sluter man inte upp bakom det sÄ sluter man egentligen inte upp bakom partiet, folk som tycker att det Àr viktigare att ha/fÄ rÀtt i nÄgon sketen procedurfrÄga fast man sitter utanför har inte förstÄtt skillnaden mellan att vara över eller under 4 %.
Ge Anna ett öppet mandat att peta de som drÀnerar hennes energi genom att krÀva att hon lÀgger den pÄ obetydligheter, vi skall som parti vara ett lÄngfinger i ansiktet och röven pÄ de korrumperade gammelpartierna, inte ett parti som sitter och letar efter stickor i samma finger dÀrför att trÀskallar kliar sig i huvudet över nÄgon procedurfrÄga.
“Det finns en anledning till att stora organisationer mĂ„ste ha hierarkier och den har ingenting med demokrati eller diktatur att göra, den Ă€r helt enkelt matematisk/logistisk.”
Jag hÄller med men bara om vi antar den urgamla politiska modell vi har nu.
framtidens system mÄste var mera tekniskt som tex venus projectet eller direct demokrati.
Jag mĂ„ste sĂ€ga att det var mycket pĂ„ grund av Ricks utstrĂ„lning och ideĂ©r som jag frĂ„n första början gick med i Partiet, och jag tycker att Rick alltid har varit en spark i baken pĂ„ överheten. För mig var det enbart positivt med nĂ„gon som kallade sig “radikalkapitalist” (eller liknande) och tog debatten om fri information till det logiska steget Barnporr, den största murbrĂ€ckan mot friheter i Sverige.
DÀremot började jag skÀmmas att kalla mig Piratpartist efter ett val dÀr ungjÀvlarna började kasta sand i frÀmst Ricks ögon. RÀddhÄgsenheten och mindervÀrdeskomplexet var redan uppenbart pÄ Piratpartiets forum, och blommade nu ut som ett jÀvla ogrÀs överallt. Jag kan bara tÀnka mig hur det var bakom kulisserna och Àr likt andra förvÄnad över att Rick orkade hÄlla ut sÄ lÀnga som han gjorde, Àven om hoppet fanns att han skulle vara en övermÀnniska.
Det var med vemod jag mottog Ricks avgĂ„ng och har svĂ„rt att se hur Anna ska fylla partiledarskorna. (Ăven om jag inte vet sĂ„ mycket om henne)
Men sÄ lÀnge som partiet blir neddraget av fÄtalet skrikande, som pinkar pÄ sig för hur Svensson ska ta ideér som Àr starka i grunden, omsatt i politik, Àr det nog kört för PP. Att vara mainstream Àr inte det samma som att segla pÄ förÀndringens vindar.
Visst hoppas man att ungjÀvlarna ska besinna sig men tills dess sÄ vÀnder jag mitt skepp mot liberaldemokraternas hamn.
Tack för din tid
Kim
Rick, thanks for your great work, I appreciate it.
This is not the end, it’s a new beginning.
This is the first time any political party is trying to organise it’s internal structures in a transparent manner. Surely the oldtimers and enemys of PP’s ideas is trying to backstab it through critisize it’s leaders and organisers, when the partis groundwork ideas is not critizable.
I hope that all we grassroots in PP is learning something from this, and going forward.
Nya partier drar alltid till sig troll och brÄkmakare som inte kan samarbeta med andra överhuvudtaget. Misstaget PP:s ledning gjorde var att inte vara tuff och utesluta de som bara saboterade.
Ăven med Anna Troberg finns risken att dessa troll börjar undergrĂ€va Annas ledarskap. De som storbrĂ„kat om Falkvinges roll bör kastas ut med huvudet före vid minsta tecken pĂ„ att de kommer att fortsĂ€tta i samma stil.
Eftersom medlemsavgiften Àr noll kronor Àr det fullt möjligt för aktiva i andra partier att gÄ med bara för att sabotera. Samma sak med Ricks blogg. Det var en period för ett par Är sedana dÄ ett gÀng troll (frÄn andra partier?) gick in för att sabotera debatten i kommentarfÀlten. TyvÀrr lyckades de innan de blev blockerade och debatten dog ut. Antalet kommentarer störtdök.
MÄste bara pÄpeka att det sannolikt hade hÀnt Àven om medlemsavgiften var 100 kr.
“Antalet kommentarer störtdök.”
SÄ gÄr det nÀr man försöker tysta och censurera obekvÀma röster. Ricks blog var ju oftast mest fylld av ja-sÀgare blir inte mycket till debatt nÀr alla stryker ledaren medhÄrs trots ledarens otaliga misstag och rent felaktiga utspel. De som pÄtalar rena felaktigheter Àr inte troll utan sÄdana som det bör lyssnas pÄ Àven om man inte hÄller med om allt.
Visp ljuger som en hel PR-konsult. Jag var med och kommer ihÄg exakt hur trollen överbefolkade bloggen och började tjafsa om allt. Det var en otroligt tröttsam advokatyr om smÄ detaljer, ords definittioner, gör si, gÄr sÄ, gör inte si, osv.
NÀr Rick till slut blockade trollen hade nÀstan alla av de vanliga besökarna redan tröttnat och försvunnit.
Putte förstÄr du inte att det behövs olika Äsikter för att det ska uppstÄ debatt? Det du klagar pÄ tillhör just debatterandet.
Hade PP’s ledare tagit lite mer allvarligt pĂ„ detaljer och inte som gjordes alltför ofta pekat med hela armen, sĂ„ hade PP kanske varit i riksdagen idag för framgĂ„ng beror ofta pĂ„ de smĂ„ detaljerna.
Det var inte olika Ă„sikter det handlade om, det handlade om helt irrelevanta personangrepp i stil med “du Ă€r ful”. Jag var med, jag tröttnade pĂ„ att kommentera dĂ€r till slut, det spelade ingen roll vad det handlade om för att precis allt skulle vridas till att alla PP anhĂ€ngare som grupp var onda pedofiler eller att Rick personligen var en hemsk mĂ€nniska, man gjorde sig lustig över hans namn och sĂ„ vidare. Försök inte lĂ„tsas som att det nĂ„gonsin handlade om konstruktiva Ă„sikter eller kritik för det gjorde det INTE.
Visp:
Nu tar du Ă€ndĂ„ i sĂ„ att du skiter pĂ„ dig. Rick mĂ„ ha och haft sina tillkorta kommanden, men det Ă€r Ă€ven det som gör en medborgarrörelse till en medborgarrörelse – det Ă€r mĂ€nniskor av kött och blod som faktiskt gĂ„r pĂ„ toa och inte ĂŒbermensch som gĂ„r för att “byta skor”.
SÄ nej, han Àr personlig inte ansvarig för utkomsten av valet. Det Àr mÄÄÄÄÄnga fler faktorer som spelat in, dÀr Ricks tillkortakommanden inte varit i nÀrheten av signifikanta.
The whiners and complainers in PP never have had anything positive to contribute, same as on this thread
All they want is to get rid of Rick but they have nothing to replace him with.
That’s why I suspect them of being record industry plants.
It’s just not possible to be a real supporter of a party that you are only working to break down.
It’s the member meeting that elects the leader not a minority group who doesn’t like the majority decision. It’s wrong (undemocratic) not to respect the majority’s decision (even if you think you are acting in the best interest of the organization). Everyone need to work together for the common goal (instead of sabotaging and/or backstabbing — that will always be counterproductive) even if we don’t agree with every decision.
There will always be room for improvement, or equivalently: it’s never going to be perfect.
Still the bigger issue here is that there is always going to be individuals that poison the atmosphere (and everyone is probably guilty of it at some point). Those who are well meaning can likely be a
sorry, accidentally submitted the previous post before completing it. đ
…can probably be reasoned with if people just take the time to talk to each other.
There will also be less well meaning people, I don’t know how to deal with that though. I assume it’s a problem in any large democratic organization. :/
If the trolls M, Pia, Hanna, Vidde, Rose Velt och Visp continue to bother Rick Anna or PP after Rick has stepped down then they can be positively identified as saboteurs.
That is exactly why I kept my mouth shut previously. Thank you for your input.
And as usual the Internet shows it’s most sunny side in the feedback to Ricks blog.
People that think that comments like that is part of the solution are actually part of the problem.
Vidde is not a troll and has never been one. I should know. We disagree sometimes but she is intelligent and very much able to give constructive critisism.
The complainers got what they wanted when Falkvinge stepped down. Now they continue with other obstructions.
The Pirate Party board should throw the trolls out of the party and the PP member forum.
I think (someone) was very right in saying it’s still a young party, and a lot of members can’t see the forest for all the trees.
Right, so Rick is a down to earth human being with flaws. I thought that was the STRENGTH of this party, rather than a double standards leader who says one thing and does another.
Rick says one thing and does that to the best of the whole party’s abilities. Making mistakes is part of learning, and I have no sympathy with anyone who throws “black criticism” against a person or the party.
I was recently at a lecture about persnoal standards within web development/design, and that relates. How, you ask? Well, whenever you try to talk to your clients (the leadership of PP here) you need to have a “yes, and” attitude instead of a “no, because” attitude.
Believe it or not, but this party is probably the most democratic party of all the swedish parties (with a size over 5), and everyone can influence and have a voice in all decisions, except for the on-th-fly ones we need to have done by someone.
I’d on principle never agree on internal censorship, but people need to show some level of personal restraint, politeness and creativity themselves. Stop talking about “people” and start talking about “ideas”!
Perhaps people will be kinder to Anna, since she’s pretty (No offence, Rick, you don’t compare đ ). (That’s an insult relating to those baser instincts of certain people btw, in case you missed it – as is this comment)
I wrote a comment here, was it censored or just left out?
What I expressed was nothing extreme at all, so I really hope it was just a technical problem with my browser or similar.
This time I just leave a reference to an article of mine that might be of relevance:
http://www.sourze.se/Direktdemokrati_ingen_ouppn%C3%A5elig_utopi_10722795.asp
In essence. What I said was just that leadership and representation itself is a kind of contradiction in a connected world. Why have a leader who makes decisions over the head of members, when it is possible to get the answer from the members in an instant?
Well. Here. Rick becomes a lot easier to work with when you don’t work with him at all.
He is sometimes easy when he likes you and he wants cash. I admit to perhaps having abused this at a time when I thought representation of the party at WIPO was very important. I was given about âŹ700 without any formal approval by the board. From a budget with âŹ50000 in a year. That is slightly more than 1% of the budget.
Before Almedalen, three cameras that cost âŹ150 euros each were bought. This is âŹ450, again, around 1% of the total budget with no prior approval.
In the election âŹ9000 were spent on candidate parties in a much criticized decision. I agree that it is fun to party, but quite frankly, as a non-candidate I would have liked or party money (and 1/5 of it none-the-less!!) to go into alcohol. They didn’t even get a DJ, and the parties were closed to the general public. This is not a good way of getting votes, which perhaps also shows in the end result.
I see a party board, and any board in an organisation, as a very important thing once the organisation starts having money. Money is a source of conflict. Money is a source of dissent. Money needs to be handled in a careful way which I perceive not to have happened ever. Rick has once incurred costs on my local constituency (SkĂ„ne) totalling 1/3 of our total annual budget, or, 1/5 of our total budget for the event (see, we got money from the youth organisation Ung pirat for holding the event). He did not remember signing up to the event. 1.5 years later our party secretary (hired half-time at the time) discovered a bill of âŹ200 for this event that had not been paid. The party secretary is no longer hired now, because keeping track of bills and other things is not valuable to this organisation.
I am very, very annoyed by this. It is completely agonizing when you, one week before an event, gets told that you have âŹ200 extra costs in a budget of âŹ1000 which was difficult to hold in the first place (because our organisation around the thing was actually not entirely unplanned). Otherwise we could have planned around this event and, say, given up our regular visitor’s information stand which was not terrible well visited but did expose our organisation and its existence to many people who didn’t know us (but were autonomous activists and therefore probably didn’t care).
I am pained by this. Like. Money is a source of conflict. If it takes you five years to not realize that, you really should start thinking about it and consider whether people may be annoyed by other people using what is essentially the money of an organisation they consider /theirs/ and to /be a part of/. Gosh.
Above holds several mistakes, I’m sure it can still be induced what I mean :-/ I obviously do /not/ want the party to buy people alcohol – I would not want that even if it were not an election campaign.
I also don’t think Rick wanted money when he gave me money, but I certainly did and can probably be accused of having abused bad leadership.
I remembered that he once hired a person to go with him on a national tour. This was a very attractive girl who’d joined the party about 2 weeks before going on the tour. Because this was a quite large cost for the organisation it caused a lot of people to be upset, but I agree that the situation, after emergency board meetings and several angry emails to Rick that apparently have destroyed his creativity, was resolved well with Anna Troberg following Rick on the tour as well. Troberg was not Rick’s choice, and to my knowledge her much desired presence on that tour was not his idea.
Uhm. About the child pornography thing: much more weird is that there is a board decision on Rick not hitting on girls because he is making girls uncomfortable to the point of them leaving the party (this happened to a friend of mine). For some reason, this has never happened to me, but I am told it might be because I’m a) scary or b) has never met him drunk.
Hi, Amelia. Unfortunately, there are several factual errors in what you claim above. This is quite unusual for you.
You are claiming that there is no prior formal approval for a number of large expenses. This is a very serious accusation, bordering on claiming that criminal embezzlement has taken place.
The board has always set budget allocations and appointed people responsible for those budgets, people responsible for various aspects of the organization’s operation. These people are then free to spend the money using their own judgment to meet the set goals. The board does not and should not approve every purchase of a pencil. Such operational details are and should be delegated to daily management. This is quite normal modus operandi.
Let’s take the three low-definition video cameras you mention as an example. They were first purchased from the Almedalen budget, in order to get cutaway footage from there, and handed out to the local districts at the end of the week in order to get cutaway footage from the local election campaigns. Such footage is tremendously important if you want to get on television. I first asked if they could charge it to their local budgets, but when that was declined, a central budget was charged that I was responsible for. The formal approval you accuse to be lacking has been present in each and every expense you mention, as part of normal budget assignments and normal daily operations. I agree that such formal approval is important; money is not a thing to be handled lightly.
The cameras can be verified in transactions #13810 and #14482, for those with access to the party ledger. The expense was filed on June 23 in transaction #13810, the documentation was approved on June 24, the expense attested on June 29, and funds were reimbursed on July 1 in transaction #14482, all by four different people. Last, the charge was moved from the Almedalen budget to a more appropriate central budget in tx #17406.
Your âŹ700 WIPO trip was also charged to a such a normal budget, and within the normal approval process. The travel budget, I believe.
If that had not been the case, the auditor would rightly have flogged the skin of both myself and the board. Every single expense is trackable down to who took the initiative to spend money, what budget was used, and which three people approved 1) the expense, 2) the documentation, and 3) the reimbursement (or payment of the invoice). Our tracking is significantly tighter than many small scale commercial operations.
As for “buying alcohol for âŹ9k”, that’s simply not true. Why didn’t you ask some people at the vitally important teambuilding exercise for our future parliamentary group how the money was spent?
Same thing with Anna following me on the tour of 2009: that was my initiative. I have no idea where you got the idea of something else. Yes, I admittedly screwed up in taking on the other person too fast, but then again, I have taken on other individuals quickly that have proven quite valuable to the organization. There was nothing like an emergency board meeting, much less in the plural like you claim, something that is easily verifiable in the collection of meeting protocols from the timeframe in question. In this matter, I backed down in my own decision and of my own accord, which was the only prudent thing to do.
Further, there is no board decision of any kind like anything near what you describe last in your post. It is unfortunate if somebody has left the party, but I cannot comment on events that are that nonspecific. I would happily admit to partying once in a while, though, and I can get drunk and make mistakes and bad judgment calls just like anybody else. It is unfortunate and certainly worth an apology the day after if and when I have made somebody feel uncomfortable.
This is quite unusual for you, Amelia. You are usually tenaciously precise with facts and details, especially facts that are easily verifiable.
@Rick & Amelia: How smart do you think it is to you common goal to have that discussion in public? (No matter who is right!) I bet people from other parties are laughing at you now, since they believe they are the ones benefiting, i think their belief is the right.
Now who am i to put my nose into this, i am not even a member of the party? Well, because i can and that you do it in public, now think about all those, the majority, that do not put their noses in it and just sail away.
I am posting a response here, and on your blog, so that I am extra certain you will get it since I’m sure you’re confident enough to only bask in the glory of the 70 or so comments you from people who have never worked close with you who completely condoned your self-pity, which, I do not.
You. Do. Cock-ups.
Then you blame other people for them. And get angry when people point them out. Like, seriously? Blue fire? You say that you have learned something these years and now you say that criticism makes you lose your inspiration? That was criticism well used then. Except for the fact that this self-pitying fool who seems unable to get it even when people point it out /very/ clearly (this holds for the âŹ9000, for instance, and for the âŹ150 (or was it âŹ1500? people were /very/ upset about it, but I guessed in your favour)). You gave the same motivation then as you do now. “It was vitally important that the cameras were bought, midimip, otherwise we would have never gotten media.” Except we did. With you kissing a 16-year old.
The reason you can sit around and say that there was “formal approval” of the way you spent cash is that you were allowed to make purchases up to âŹ1000? âŹ5000? without asking the board. This was in fact one of the points of criticism that arose on the annual congress in 2009.
A congress which is not yet over btw, because you and your board can’t be arsed with paperwork. I notice that while the party had a secretary there were protocols from the meets.
The thing is. You have been a dictator and spent comparatively huge parts of our resources without asking anyone else for approval. It is true that the board does not approve every pencil bought but this falls under a budget called “office material” which is usually not controlle by party chairman. You single-handedly controllen as much as 10% of our total resources and you spent them badly. Do you really see nothing wrong with this?
My money, our money, shared money, good money. Which was, as you yourself admit in your blogpost and subsequent comment on my criticism, used on a “small minority of the members” not the “thousands of activists” that were working on ground level.
In SkĂ„ne we had a budget of what? âŹ1000 for the election year? I could be off by âŹ500 or so, but that is not. a. lot. of. money. for. an. entire. district. in. an. election. year. Especially not when âŹ9000 is spent on a “small minority” for a “kick off fest”. We had SkĂ„ne posters and Lund posters printed on a home printer, despite the fact that there was a annual congress decision on being able to be in local election – a decision you never liked and fought against vigorously (shows in the budget?).
Do you not see anything wrong with this? I agree that you should have realized you had to be more careful – WITH MONEY! WITH MONEY, RICK! You pissed everyone off except the people who did not know for 4 years. Fou! People who don’t keep track of what you’re doing are quite happy with you. People who do go insane and blubber things about that you’re a, well, I should say resource wasting leader. And now you are going to represent me in Europe.
Stop this self-pitying insanity. Just stop. I should be the one pitying myself.
Incidentally I do not, so much. I have a lot of friends who are considerably more knowledgable with what they do, and who teach me an awful lot about everything. This Saturday is Public Domain Day in four different cities in Italy. I, for some reason, know quite a bit about the public domain and orphan works and older works where the authors are known but impractical to track down (news paper articles for instance, or media such as films) so that they can’t be archived legally, but in Luxembourg they do anyway because they have very gutsy librarians who are very scared about getting sued, and in the Netherlands there is a film archive that doesn’t have a lot of films because the paperwork is too much for each and every one of them.
I am very concerned about this. I have accessed both archives just to check them out, and that’s like, a very valuable resource they’re providing there. It hurts not being able to take legal part in this archived material – I am, as a private individual, essentially doing something illegal watching these illegal copies. It hurts me.
Now, as opposed to you and criticism, I take these things very seriously. Extended collective licensing would make these people being legaly able to provide me with an archive of material that I like very much and want very much to have access to sooner than 120 years after they were created (most works after 1950 I wont even get to see enter the public domain).
The Piratpartiet is against extended collective licensing. I am really very torn about this. Extended collective licenses justify and perpetuate an essentially bad system for managing works. But they are also a quick fix that will benefit me and everyone else.
In Sweden we don’t notice there problems so much, because we already have extended collective licensing which makes these problems less obvious to us. I have realised that there is a very low understanding of this, except among the people I talk with. And this is like, a point of reflection and subsequent agony for me since… 9 months or so. Or since I started evangelising less and listening more.
Amelia’s behavior is indeed strange. Maybe her account has been hacked by some enemy of the party.
@Fredrik: Any one can write any name and and any website when posting on this blog, so there is nothing to hack. But the first Amelia-post was probably genuine since Rick replied to it the way he did.
@Fredrik and @Magnus: Amelia’s posts are duplicated on her own blog http://stenskott.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/anger/#comment-1806
Henrik, that probably means that the swedish saga of the PP is over, internal turmoil ended it.
This also means that all the activists must find other ways to make a difference.
How exactly do you make the connection that an MEP chewing out the former party leader means the party is doomed? If Christoffer Fjeller was angry with Carl Bildt, would that mean the Moderate party would have to shut down?
If it was done like this, yes.
This show a dysfunct party. Both Rick and Amelia do know that this hurt both the party and their common goal, but since the do it anyway proves that they know that it does not matter (none of them are fools) since the party already has gone south internally.
There’s constructive critisism and then their’s being plain rude. Now, I have no idea what Rick is like as a leader or the internal climate in the party or what Rick has or hasn’t done with party funds etc, (he may very well be in the wrong) but I cannot help but find Amelia’s comments very off putting. This is not the impression I had off her before as a quite sensible person.
Now, she may very well be correct about the things she write about Rick – that is not for me to decide – but the tone in which its is writen strikes me as quite unsettling unesseccarily nasty. Amelia, I admire your personal strenght and political vision, but I honestly belive that it was possible for you to get your points across in a more polite and respectful manner, without making it seem like you plainly loath Rick (becaue that is pretty much how it can’ help but be interpreted).
What Amelia doesn’t understand is this: What A says about B, says much more about A, then about B. Amelia shows her true colors in a very unflattering way here and in her own blog, I think. They are blue, as in the aforementioned “blue fire”, and thus she’s proving Ricks point very very much so, and this is the funny part: She does not realise this! đ
I agree with Rick wholeheartedly about the “blue fire”, it is there. I have seen it and also in another life been the target of it. I have not commented on this practice very often.but sadly that’s what it is in this organization – a practice, something one does first and foremost as seen in countless examples in the forum.
The number of times I have seen someone think about things and ask the much better question “What can we do to make this better?” are very few, the “blue fire” crap-flinging critique fest gets started really quick.
Everyone sets the bar all the time. Amelia too. You know the saying – it takes a village to raise a child? Well since Amelia is a very public part of this practice, a part of the village in our forum, our blogosphere, and just doing more of the same which does nothing to stop it, and instead promotes it, she can also look forward in happy anticipation to be the target of the same exact behavior when and if she becomes a EU-parliment member and gets more mind-share than now. By then this behaviour will likely have become even more cemented in our “childrens”, to stretch the analogy, hearts and minds – we will think that this is the thing we do.
One such comment from me about the “blue fire” is here:
https://forum.piratpartiet.se/showthread.php?p=222642&postcount=40
(That thread is full of it, also I’m Taz_1999)
But you have to wonder what fuzzy reasoning came just before Amelia wrote the entry in her blog in which she is lying about easily verifiable stuff (that Rick has disproven above) adding insult to injury and also, this is a new low, adding some really juicy insinuations, about Ricks character, that can’t be proven or disproven in any shape or form. As such they are the perfect method of shoveling crap at someone and hope it sticks – tell a big lie, repeat it often – you know who said that? This is the very definition of “blue fire”. I’ has no purpose exept draining someones energy.
So Amelia what happened at that particular time that made it look like a good idea to write this steaming pile of dung? This very public crap throwing spectacle? Exept of cource to again prove Ricks point – Blue fire exists. You’re it!
I don’t exactly know what the required skill set is to be a good member of the EU-parliment, but I’m pretty sure THIS in not it!
Too bad Amelia is the caliber of person the Pirate party has gotten to represent it in the EU parliment. How did that happen exactly btw? But considering the fact that there used to be a person on the Pirate party board that belives in conspiracy theories, and probably – I’m just guessing here – also alien abductions and the very popular anal probing , Area 51, that the moon landing never happened, and other magical thinking (quick: google boobquake!) and my personal favourite: that there are lizard people everywhere, especially news casters! I for one welcome our new lizard alien overlords! This person is now gone, and I’m personally very happy about that.
So measured against that very crooked and frankly puny yard stick, maybe bat-shit-crazy-crap-flinging-EU-parliment-seat-holder-to-be, might be a step up for us? It’s just what we deserve for voting so badly.
What A says about B says more about A, then B. So Amelia â WTH are you doing?
Here is an example of how constructive critisism can be articulated without resorting to personal attacks: http://jorgenl.blogspot.com/2011/01/patiledarrollen-i-piratpartiet.html
I encourage everyone to read this, and take note of how Jörgen manages to critize both the party structure and desicions made by Rick personally, without resorting to personal attacks or insinuations and maintaining a civilized tone. This is critisism done right.
[…] Johannes Forssberg. Detta blir Ă€n mer tydligt i ett av de orsaker han angav för att avgĂ„: “Blue fire“, dvs attacker frĂ„n de egna. NĂ€r kritik kommer frĂ„n det egna partiet sĂ„ blev det genast […]
Quoting Peter Andersson:
January 9, 2011 – 14:44
âGreat minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.â â Eleanor Roosevelt
_____
Exceptional minds try to overcome statistical and organisatorial mayhem that occur whenever some organisation with a goal has to cope with the available proportion of great minds, average minds and small minds in this world of ours.
Many comments point to the obvious… everyone should learn to be constructive, because any other behaviour just consumes resources best spent on some positive action.
But, this world of ours being in the utterly chaotic situation it is, understanding why people who ignore too much can not behave the way those who know a little more think they should and those that know still more aknowledge the second ones telling the first ones anything won’t be helpfull at all, is very important if a democratic organization needs to be kept alive.
Telling an ignorant person he is ignorant does not make him smarter… only unhappy about his new knowledge. The only reasonable thing to do is to maneouver him in such a situation that he has to find out things by himself, and gets prouder and prouder of being able to find out new things, until he builds up his own momentum and need to be tricked no more.
It is up to those who know to make sure not to ask from anybody else more than they are capable of, because failure breaks momentum if not handled properly.
I guess I’m telling you almost each of you is failing to perform adecuately at the competence level that should be his, because even if done in good faith it misses the point: everyone should try to improve on his own level and all of you should be using their own knowledge to push everyone else up from where he stands but not beyond the possibilities of his present situation, because then you only get a dropout.
Non democratic organizations (almost all existent, according to my standards) have an easier job, because they can and do choose to actively exclude anyone who is not litterate enough not to piss against the wind (I should really take more care of gender neutrality issues, but guess what, I’m not perfect either đ ). Pirate Party won’t be any better unless it learns to cope with ignorance the right way.
My fellow countrymen here in Spain are smarter… they are already causing prehistoric pains in PPI by having two Pirate Parties… won’t be long until they reach the final solution: to each his own tailor-made Pirate Party. Utterly convenient to each personal ego, but politically a dead end of course.
Learning to live together is such a pain in the ass, but guess what: we still have but one Earth, we can’t give each his own to do as he wishes.
If I have to choose between talking to Rick or talking to Amelia… the only right solution is to talk to none.
If you can’t understand what this means to your effort as a party… you’re going nowhere.
My 2 cents.
P.S.: Guess I’d better not become a member yet.
[…] Alicia Keys Alicia Witt Amanda Bynes Amanda Detmer E-mail This Post Print This Post Add Your Comment | No Comments Tweet This […]
[…] Hilary Swank Isla Fisher Ivana Bozilovic Ivanka Trump […]
Nu du Amelia, sĂ„ Ă€r det din tur att se upp sĂ„ att pengarna och âmaktenâ du har som EU-parlamentariker, inte berusar och korrumperar ditt omdöme. Det kommer att komma mĂ„nga frestelser pĂ„ vĂ€genâŠ
in english:
Now Amelia, itâs your turn to watch out so that money and âpowerâ you have as an MEP, not intoxicates and corrupts your review. There will be many temptations along the way âŠ