Looks good to me. We can add the same in homepage too.

looks good

I'm not very sure about the current description or the proposed description. I think we can do better.

Pirates stand for human rights and social justice. Pirate activities are inspired from FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) philosophy and support direct democracy, open/transparent governance, open content (free sharing of knowledge), personal privacy and net neutrality usually called together as Pirate ideas.

These philosophies surrounding FOSS have been around long before Software existed, I think we should focus on the roots of the philosophy. I'm saying this because when we say FOSS we sound very ITish, for someone who is not in the IT field this might not resonate much. Even for someone in the IT field, I don't think all of them would be aware of FOSS enough to understand the philosophies behind it. If we are directly talking about the root philosophies it would be much better.

We also need to be clear on the definition of these terms (direct democracy, open/transparent governance, open content (free sharing of knowledge), personal privacy and net neutrality). As you know, in politics, people conveniently change the definition of every word to fit their aims, we need to be clear about our goals in the description. It will be long, but I think the description of a political party should be long.

Lastly, I have seen lot of proposals in this forum on various political issues. I think we are at a very nascent stage and we should discuss (and educate) among ourselves about various philosophies, ideologies and issues before going to a stage where we take a stand about things.

We also need to be clear on the definition of these terms (direct democracy, open/transparent governance, open content (free sharing of knowledge), personal privacy and net neutrality). As you know, in politics, people conveniently change the definition of every word to fit their aims, we need to be clear about our goals in the description. It will be long, but I think the description of a political party should be long.

This description is just to give an overview, we have http://pirates.org/constitution and http://pirates.org.in/manifesto for more detailed explanation of our stands.

These philosophies surrounding FOSS have been around long before Software existed, I think we should focus on the roots of the philosophy.

Yes, we can substitute FOSS with the root idea of FOSS. How about "Pirate activities are inspired from voluntary collaboration and free sharing of knowledge as seen in Free Software communities".

Lastly, I have seen lot of proposals in this forum on various political issues. I think we are at a very nascent stage and we should discuss (and educate) among ourselves about various philosophies, ideologies and issues before going to a stage where we take a stand about things.

We can never learn about everything before we take a stand, instead, if we realize we need to change a stand later, we can do that. This "learn everything before starting something" is a common mistake most people make, it prevents them from doing anything (one example I can point to is in programming, people think they need to master a programming language before they write their first program). Many things you learn while doing something. The other issue is to try and make a fool proof document that will never change. We are making a living constitution and manifesto that is open to criticism and change.

If you like the current constitution, you can be an associate.

We can never learn about everything before we take a stand, instead, if we realize we need to change a stand later, we can do that.

I hold a different view, I'm very bad at explaining thing but will try. Firstly, I don't see what is the need to take a stand on every issue immediately? And it doesn't make sense to make that issue the official stand of the party when the party has hardly any members. To really consider ourselves capable of making a stand, we need to have enough people with vibrant viewpoints to contribute to a discussion. If we make the official stance of this party on any issue, people who have an opposing view will never even think about sharing their perspective with us. So, 'if we realize we need to change' will never come.

Pirate Party in India is non-existent and will be very small for a couple of lifetimes maybe. That is not a problem with itself, but small groups tend to form a clique and continue to grow as an echo chamber, ultimately killing their diversity and self growth.

This "learn everything before starting something" is a common mistake most people make, it prevents them from doing anything (one example I can point to is in programming, people think they need to master a programming language before they write their first program). Many things you learn while doing something. The other issue is to try and make a fool proof document that will never change. We are making a living constitution and manifesto that is open to criticism and change.

I don't think this analogy applies to the current situation even remotely as learning about an issue like AFSPA is not the same as learning a programming language. Moreover, I'm not saying we should do a degree on AFSPA before taking a stand, but my point is that we should have a healthy discussion with people from various viewpoints and sections of the society. Currently its just a bunch of software engineers.

Moreover. What are we aiming to achieve by making a stand. Are we aiming for popularity? If yes, then taking a stand, criticising whoever is in power and stuff is the way to go. But if our aim is to build a community which has solid foundations in rationality, logic and things like that, our main aim should be to build a platform or a movement of sorts where we will learn how to think, debate and communicate our thoughts and taking a stand is the last thing that should concern us.

:)

I hold a different view, I'm very bad at explaining thing but will try. Firstly, I don't see what is the need to take a stand on every issue immediately? And it doesn't make sense to make that issue the official stand of the party when the party has hardly any members. To really consider ourselves capable of making a stand, we need to have enough people with vibrant viewpoints to contribute to a discussion. If we make the official stance of this party on any issue, people who have an opposing view will never even think about sharing their perspective with us. So, 'if we realize we need to change' will never come.

Its important to have your own views and we celebrate different views here. Since the life experience of each of us are different our views are also shaped by those experiences. There are also people who hold diametrically opposite view as you. They say we are too slow in formulating our policy, they want to register as a party immediately, want to have a fool proof constitution and manifesto (have some one sit on it like Ambedkar did for Indian constitution and have an up down vote for the whole thing, they get irritated with having so many proposal and votes). My opinions is in the middle (don't have to rush or don't have to shy away) and I see Indian Pirates have space for both. Those who want to focus on debates, study and focus on those and others can focus on completing the constitution, policies, contesting elections, reaching out to masses etc.

Pirate Party in India is non-existent and will be very small for a couple of lifetimes maybe. That is not a problem with itself, but small groups tend to form a clique and continue to grow as an echo chamber, ultimately killing their diversity and self growth.

That happens when the group is closed. We are very open and we have space for all people. Though we've so far not been able to reach to a large number of people. If we look back in history, any new idea started with small groups, it takes time for the masses to accept new ideas. It would not take us forward if we are afraid to take a stand that is opposed by the majority. If you look back in our archives you will see people opposing different proposal and ideas. Proposal to contest elections was strongly opposed, just to give an example.

We never lacked dissent and its at the very core of what we exist. We had to give up on our first experiment of Pirate Party of India because we wanted to live our ideals rather than keeping the party alive. There were strong attacks on the party and we refused to ban the people who attacked. Most people got fed up by the flame wars and left. We preferred to shut down the party instead of compromising on the core ideas of Free Speech and dissent.

I agree with the principles, but they must be more generalized. Promotion of FOSS is the job of something like the FSF. While we would support FOSS as a government it should essentially be covered by the mention of direct democracy in most spheres of life. I think we should use phrases like "protection of all rights including digital rights, promotion of life sciences and provisions for basic social security."

I agree with the principles, but they must be more generalized. Promotion of FOSS is the job of something like the FSF.

We are just saying we were inspired by Free Software communities as they demonstrated the power of voluntary collaboration and free sharing of knowledge. If not for them, I would not have felt it is really practical to do collaboration over the internet.

Free Software communities like Debian, with their direct democratic/do-o-cratic structure were an inspiration to chose a direct democratic structure (Every member has an equal vote, and a person has to demonstrate their commitment to our principles before we accept them as a member) we are practicing here. If not for that experience, we might have ended up being like another party with hierarchical structure (national committee, state committee and district committees etc). So I think it is very important we mention that.

A description here is not a substitute of our constitution and manifesto, it is a summary of what we generally stand for, and we have constitution and manifesto for detailed explanations.