[ILUG] patents again

[John Madden]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On (26/04/05 17:50), Niall Walsh didst pronounce:
> >No, I wouldn't go down this route. If _they_ make a statement regarding
> >their position, then I'd be in favour of putting them into one of the
> >clear categories. However, I would be against labeling ministers
> >depending on what their party is doing, since it can happen that
> >ministers make up their own mind on where they stand on an issue --
> >sure, it's not common, but it can happen :)
> >
> So you just let the FF MEPs stay quiet and hence go down as "no 
> position"?   If they want to be part of a political party then they 
> should expect that it is always assumed that they agree with the party 
> line in the absence of a personal public statement to the contrary.  
> Live by the sword, die by the sword.
> 
In my opinion, going down as "no position" shows one, or both, of two
things : they don't know about the directive, or they don't care about
the directive. Both of these are _not_ positions that any self
respecting politician should be in. At least the "considering their
opinion" group are shown to have done _some_ research into the
directive, and are in the process of making up their minds on their
position. Those who have no position simply don't care about its
effects on Ireland, don't know the effects it could have, or simply
don't know anything about the directive. This just shows apathy towards
the voters, and, presuming they don't clarify their position, puts them
in a very bad light (again, in my opinion only).

> I would rather see Political Parties removed from the Ballot Papers and 
> each individual standing on their own two feet for election, but that is 
> not the system we have.  Under the system we have I think it is more 
> then fair to assume that someone follows their party position in absence 
> of a statement to the contrary (when they are given a chance to make 
> such a statement, hence I suggest giving them a last chance, perhaps 
> even telling them where we will place them and why so no answer is a 
> tacit agreement).
> 
This is a fair argument, and I see your point on it. However, my above
statement would more clearly reflect my opinion on it.

I think a simple mail stating our reservations about the directive, and
asking if the minister accepts or rejects the directive in its current
form would suffice. Any non-replies should be considered as "No
Position" (and hence, my above opinion applies to them). If Ireland is 
one of the largest software exporters in the world (isn't it?), and
there are elected representatives who won't take the time to research a
directive that could dramatically affect that industry, it shows how
little they really care about the economy and the voters.

> If they have made up their own minds, they should be proud to tell us!
> 
Agreed. No matter which side they're on, it at least shows them to care
enough about the country to have researched the directive and its
implications.

- -- 
Chat ya later,

John.
- --
BOFH excuse #1: clock speed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCboV5QBw+ZtKOvTIRAhJ5AJ4tHZ9AQIEHauRl26v9VU+SsN/9OgCfSt7j
zuKRrHUfZoNIT4h++ilqjNU=
=1oQV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----