Mar 24, 17 / Ari 27, 01 04:23 UTC

Re: Decree N3 by The Asgardia Head of Nation  

I'd then heavily suggest throwing everything you find into maltego - it can also arrange the people into a heiracheal tree and store the information it finds about them tidily.

Mar 24, 17 / Ari 27, 01 17:03 UTC

It doesn't help much, Jason. There is absolutely no way to tell from the linked pages which AIRC employees have anything to do with Asgardia.

How long does it take to write up a list? You said it was in the works five days ago. I wouldn't expect it to take this long unless there isn't actually an organization in place.

Mar 24, 17 / Ari 27, 01 17:20 UTC

I have had limited success in trying to figure it out myself, but here's what I have been able to ascertain so far from my dealings:

  1. Head of Nation - Igor Ashurbeyli
    1. Unknown Role - Lena De Winne
      1. Volunteer Designated Lead - Rebekah Berg
        1. Volunteer Media Producer_ - Ann
        2. Volunteer Media Director - Ryan Zohar
        3. Volunteers Forum Mods
      2. Unknown Role - Linda

I am sure someone can add to it from there.

Mar 24, 17 / Ari 27, 01 20:55 UTC

^ Yeah. That looks like a great start Phicksur. Maybe we are going to have to do some detective work to put all that info together. The problem that I have is that I don't speak Russian and all the stuff I've found on the net is scarce in English. I think that our Russian-speaking friends will have much better luck.

Also, I know there is a video of Dr. Ashurbeyli addressing the press the day he announced Asgardia, but I cannot find it anywhere.

Mar 25, 17 / Tau 00, 01 18:18 UTC

I feel as "a problem" the fact we have to dig to find relevant data about who is really governing Asgardia at the moment, about the hierarchy, about which projects are going on, and who in these projects is involved.
This have the flavor of (too many) things are going on behind the scenes.

There is only one case in which I've not to care about things which 're going on behind the scenes: when I'm a spectator.
But I thought we was "workers" (directly or indirectly) of all the things was going on, we should be the "builders"... are we the spectators instead?

Mar 26, 17 / Tau 01, 01 05:57 UTC

@Elwe Thor, I agree with you 100%. The fact that we have to "dig" for info is ridiculous.

Mar 26, 17 / Tau 01, 01 06:19 UTC

The fact that most hold several docile media accounts does make it rediculously easy to do the digging.

Mar 26, 17 / Tau 01, 01 22:42 UTC

^ Maybe that's true. The point is that "digging" should be unnecessary. We should have a page in this site that we could click to listing a directory. Even universities have this on their websites. Pretty simple thing to do in my opinion.

Mar 27, 17 / Tau 02, 01 13:57 UTC

Not only, @Yovy, Asgardia claims it's managed by scientists: I'm asking if is "scientific" having so many projects without a plan.
But I'm sure a plan exist so, why not making it public? (I asked it in the past: here)
@Phicksur told "there are no secrets" but to me it seems there are.

Apr 28, 17 / Gem 06, 01 16:49 UTC

Stavo pensando alle prossime votazioni, a proposito del documento di Unità, della Costituzione e delle altre cose: sbaglio se dico che si tratterà semplicemente di una "raccolta di consensi"? Cioè, dato che nel relativo Regolamento non sono previste cose come il quorum o la percentuale di voti per cui i documenti saranno approvati, ammettiamo il caso limite in cui il 99,99% degli utenti voti "no" ed uno solo (il Dr. Ashurbeyli ad esempio) voti "si": Asgardia avrà comunque un documento di Unità ed una Costituzione approvati (da una persona) e tutti gli altri rimarranno "utenti" senza diventare "cittadini", questo stando al Regolamento.
Ovviamente nulla previene che, in un secondo tempo (e senza ulteriori votazioni), gli utenti che lo vorranno, tramite un "processo di approvazione" che non è ancora stato formalizzato, potranno diventare cittadini.
Dico quanto sopra perchè, leggendo i vari thread nel forum, mi sembra ci sia la sensazione che i documenti per cui stiamo per votare (e dei quali dobbiamo ancora leggere le versioni semi-definitive) possano essere rifiutati tramite un voto negativo di una qualche maggioranza: non mi pare sia così.

I  was thinking about the next vote on the Unity Document, the  Constitution and other things: is it wrong if I say that it will simply  be a "collection of consents"? That  is, since there are no issues such as the quorum or the percentage of  votes for which the documents will be approved, we will admit the limit  case where 99.99% of users rated "no" and only one (Dr. Ashurbeyli for example) votes "yes": Asgardia will have an approved  document (one person) and all others will remain "users" without  becoming "citizens", according to the Rules.
Obviously, nothing prevents that, at a later time (and without further  vote), users who will want it through an "approval process" that has  not yet been formalized will become citizens.
I  say the above because, reading the various threads in the forum, there  seems to be the feeling that the documents for which we are voting (and  of which we still have to read the semi-definitive versions) can be  rejected by a negative vote of some majority : I do not think so.