[top-politics] Re: TOP oriented to individual, not organisation

illegale — 2006-12-04 19:40:50+0100

Thx Serge.

I did not now for him.

ATB,
Gale

--—-—_----—-—-—---—~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics?hl=en _--—---------——_—--~-

[top-politics] collective action management system / inroads

Mark Rosst — 2006-11-25 22:52:35+0100

S: [...]but is the following pledge what you had in mind? http://www.vpsystems.net/Nevada/?page_id=50 by the way, from what I could gather, I think this guy has lost to a republican

-M: R*epublican not *republican. example: I am a republican but not a Republican.
Proper noun vs. common noun.

S: Regards, Serge

[top-politics] Re: TOP oriented to individual, not organisation

Serge — 2006-11-25 14:20:27+0100

Hey Gale,
Emmanuel knew about this already, so maybe you do too, but is the following pledge what you had in mind?
http://www.vpsystems.net/Nevada/?page_id=50
by the way, from what I could gather, I think this guy has lost to a republican.
Regards,
Serge

[top-politics] Re: TOP oriented to individual, not organisation

Gordan Ponjavic — 2006-11-24 18:08:36+0100

Serge wrote:

The birth of political ISO certification. Talk about what a kick in the anthill that would be…

Joke aside, I agree that a certification makes sense for organizations. And I must say I find the idea of certifying individuals quite incongruous.

Hmh. I am thinking about manifest, not certification. Thing that explains why I as a politician accept TOP in my work.

Most if not all certifications of individuals today are done following some kind of training and standardized form of exam or assessment (thinking of doctors, lawyers, techniciancs, assermented public officers, etc).

Read more… / Lire plus…

In some time, it makes sense to make trainings for TOP politicians, as long as todays politician schools are based on regular politics where use of Internet is practically not existent. Doctors who teach young politicians in those schools regularly ignore internet. I do not blame them, as long as free info flow means completely new approach which eliminates big part of traditional doctrine.

A method that could be used to certify someone – a political figure I assume – as TOP is something I have a lot of trouble imagining. Where do you start? How can you be sure you are not only being given access to the records that go in favour of the applicant? Would it take a long time (high costs likely if so) to audit an applicant and after that to check compliance? Gale, could you give a description of how you see this in practical terms?

So. Why do I think about individual, not organization? In that way we do not have to make no speculations. All I need is my gut and feeling of what is right and what is wrong. I can write manifest for my name. It will be probably the same thing as other people who understand TOP philosophically will adopt. I know that some people who agree with that only at declarative level wont accept it and that is actually the point, as long as it is very popular among politicians to think that people are cattle/lemmings who do not deserve truth who can not respect truth, so that todays politics is just an image of what works fine. And these same people on declarative level are for free speach, freedom of information, public has the right to know and similar stuff. When I get oriented to myself only and what i feel, I do not have to think about these speculations of what other people think, which is rather importnat thing, I belive.

How does it look like? Like regular manifest. Saying what is not existing right now, what I am pissed off at, what I believe it is important and why I do things in a way I do them. Of course, to make some better thing, stuff needs to be passed through many more brains, but this is the start that makes sense to me. It has nothing to certification houses, but mere explanation why TOP anyway? What I want to do with TOP, why do I work in a TOP manner even when it is not so opportunistic and why it pays off.

In that way some other “maybe” thinkers might make final decision and become TOP which is rather important thing.

ATB,
Gale

Best regards,

Serge