Removing the sentence doesn't make us suddenly inclusive towards non-young, non-educated citizens. Neither does existence of that sentence make us not inclusive.

@Akshay i disagree, existence of that sentence in the constitution does make us non-inclusive. it means we consider a special section of society as more important than others. this is different from giving importance to Women or Dalit issues because in such cases we're supporting under-privileged sections of the society to realize equal life chances which is definitely not the case with young and educated citizens. being young is a special, unearned advantage which qualifies as a 'privilege'. so i kindly request you to reconsider this proposal based on the terms of 'privilege'.

I would go with young and old people. Scapping Educated Citizens both exclusive wording.

Intelligent people exist without Education so we could use this to.

But Citizen is exclusive because not all the people in the world have citizen status,

@Abraham Raji I closed the new thread. Can you create a proposal here including suggestions by @Akshay . If we can find a wording acceptable to Akshay we can go ahead.

Since the last proposal sort of didn't get anywhere, I would like to propose the wording proposed my @Pirate Praveen as a result of the previous dicussions:

We would like to engage with people who have access to the internet and can speak English initially (until we have a critical mass). We understand this is a limitation we need to overcome eventually. We seek to remove the barriers of language and technology which prevents others from participating. This could include actions such as translation of content and finding ways to reach out to people who are denied access to the internet. Once we find enough people willing to do the translations, we can include more languages for participating in decisions too.

This seems to explain our current conditions, acknowledge our limitations and sounds more inclusive than the current statement in the constitution. I urge everyone to participate in this proposal.

I don't think the limitation to english is helpful for India Pirates. If people want to connect with us and speak in their own language, we can answer if we understand that language. Considering @Pirate Praveen's election campaigning, I would suggest that we already engage or try to engage with non english speaking people. @Abraham Raji would you consider an amendment along these lines?

हम उन लोगों के साथ जुड़ना चाहते हैं, जिनके पास इंटरनेट तक पहुंच है और शुरू में अंग्रेजी बोल सकते हैं (जब तक कि हमारे पास एक महत्वपूर्ण द्रव्यमान न हो)। हम समझते हैं कि यह एक सीमा है जिसे हमें अंततः दूर करने की आवश्यकता है। हम भाषा और तकनीक की बाधाओं को दूर करना चाहते हैं जो दूसरों को भाग लेने से रोकता है। इसमें सामग्री का अनुवाद और इंटरनेट तक पहुंच से वंचित लोगों तक पहुंचने के तरीके खोजने जैसे कार्य शामिल हो सकते हैं। एक बार जब हम पर्याप्त लोगों को अनुवाद करने के लिए तैयार पाते हैं, तो हम निर्णयों में भाग लेने के लिए और भी भाषाओं को शामिल कर सकते हैं।

well ich i can translate this with 3 clicks i supose its ok to try and use other languages the question is does the translation make sense^^

Then we have the problem that there are people who can not read and write. So talking to people is still the best way to be a Pirate^^

We would like to engage with people who have Humanrights and let them know that they have them. People who have access to the internet and can speak English Can Help us build up our Group . We understand that their are Limitations We seek to remove the barriers of language and technology which prevents others from participating. This could include actions such as translation of content and finding ways to reach out to people who are denied access to the internet. Once we find enough people willing to do the translations, we can include more languages for participating in decisions too.

I would go for something in this direction.

हम ऐसे लोगों के साथ जुड़ना चाहते हैं, जिनके मानवाधिकार हैं और उन्हें पता है कि उनके पास है। वे लोग जिनके पास इंटरनेट तक पहुंच है और अंग्रेजी बोल सकते हैं, हमारे समूह का निर्माण करने में हमारी सहायता कर सकते हैं। हम समझते हैं कि उनकी सीमाएँ हैं हम भाषा और प्रौद्योगिकी की बाधाओं को दूर करना चाहते हैं जो दूसरों को भाग लेने से रोकता है। इसमें सामग्री का अनुवाद और इंटरनेट तक पहुंच से वंचित लोगों तक पहुंचने के तरीके खोजने जैसे कार्य शामिल हो सकते हैं। एक बार जब हम पर्याप्त लोगों को अनुवाद करने के लिए तैयार पाते हैं, तो हम निर्णयों में भाग लेने के लिए और भी भाषाओं को शामिल कर सकते हैं।

ham aise logon ke saath judana chaahate hain, jinake maanavaadhikaar hain aur unhen pata hai ki unake paas hai. ve log jinake paas intaranet tak pahunch hai aur angrejee bol sakate hain, hamaare samooh ka nirmaan karane mein hamaaree sahaayata kar sakate hain. ham samajhate hain ki unakee seemaen hain ham bhaasha aur praudyogikee kee baadhaon ko door karana chaahate hain jo doosaron ko bhaag lene se rokata hai. isamen saamagree ka anuvaad aur intaranet tak pahunch se vanchit logon tak pahunchane ke tareeke khojane jaise kaary shaamil ho sakate hain. ek baar jab ham paryaapt logon ko anuvaad karane ke lie taiyaar paate hain, to ham nirnayon mein bhaag lene ke lie aur bhee bhaashaon ko shaamil kar sakate hain.

1. I agree and disagree with @Abraham Raji's proposal

2. I agree on the part where we should recognize language will be a barrier for communication.

3. But we should never discourage someone who prefer to talk in their native language. It should be the the speaker's choice.

4. While making that choice, speaker should understand the it will reduce the reach of the information they are planning to present.

5. There will be cases where speaker/listener has no option, but to use their native language.

6. This should be a part apology to those who prefer to use or don't understand English also a part future goal to attain translation in all possible languages with the availability of time and volunteers.

7. And in local groups, people might prefer using their native language.

8. I disagree with the choice of words that used to present the idea.

9. I suggest something like below.

We recognize language is a barrier for communication and we understand the need for information to be available in different languages. We do not discourage the use of native language in Pirate discussions, but it is preferred to use the commonly used language(s) for the sake of communication. We will do best of our efforts in making the information available in different languages with the availability of time and brave volunteers.

In my opinion no such statement is necessary in the constitution. How do we engage with people who don't speak English or don't have internet accessibility should be part of other short term execution plan not the constitution.

i agree with this opinion of @Hash Singularity. this makes me question the nature of goals specified in the Constitution, is it about how we want to improve internally or is it about how we want to improve the society? in my opinion it's better to separate both. we can also rethink whether to add goals to a separate document instead of the Constitution, but that's another debate.

website updated to reflect the changes: https://pirates.org.in/constitution