[Imc-jakarta] Re: [New-imc] Fwd: Jakarta IndyMedia - Seeking Clarification
and Advice
Jay
jay at tao.ca
Fri, 17 May 2002 05:16:43 -0400
--=====================_22786484==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sam, Boud, all,
It's great, Sam, that you have been so helpful to the Jakarta IMC. Bravo!
I think what Boud is saying is right. In a place where internet access is
expensive and difficult, an IMC can/must do work primarily off-line to have it
be effective. Whether or not an IMC makes media on or off the internet, the
general organizing principles are the same -- have meetings, have enough people
to sustain a group, gather a mission statement and editorial policy, not be
dominated by one organization. Once a group is well-organized, getting linked
on the left column of the indymedia sites could very well be as easy as sending
in responses to the membership criteria.
I'm pretty sure Boud has translated much of the new-imc documents into
Indonesian, which should give the Jakarta group an extra boost. I'm sure your
presence, Sam, will be quite helpful, even if it's only over the next couple
days.
As for regionalization, yes yes yes! Asia-Pacific has gone further than most
other regions in "approving" their own IMCs, which is why the Jakarta site is
able to be up in general. I really think that's a good thing, as long as we're
using the same or very similar principles and criteria -- if not, I imagine
there would be some confusion. I still think every new imc would have to clear
through imc-process though before they're linked through the www.indymedia.org
site, so everyone can get a chance to get to know them before we all invite
them into the network. I see no reason why Asia-Pacific can't "approve" local
IMCs, sort of like the new-imc working group does, sending along their
membership criteria and other stuff to imc-process when the imcs are ready.
I'd like to see that kind of thing work in conjunction with the new-imc group,
rather than separate from it, but I see no reason why Asia-Pacific couldn't
take more of an active role.
At one point Praccus was working pretty closely with the new-imc group to make
something like this possible but communication has fallen off as of late. If
anyone else is willing to fulfill that role, or if Praccus would like to revive
it, there'd be nothing but enthusiasm from my direction.
Cheers,
Jay
--=====================_22786484==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<font size=3D3>Sam, Boud, all,<br>
<br>
It's great, Sam, that you have been so helpful to the Jakarta IMC.
Bravo! <br>
<br>
I think what Boud is saying is right. In a place where internet
access is expensive and difficult, an IMC can/must do work primarily
off-line to have it be effective. Whether or not an IMC makes media
on or off the internet, the general organizing principles are the same --
have meetings, have enough people to sustain a group, gather a mission
statement and editorial policy, not be dominated by one
organization. Once a group is well-organized, getting linked on the
left column of the indymedia sites could very well be as easy as sending
in responses to the membership criteria. <br>
<br>
I'm pretty sure Boud has translated much of the new-imc documents into
Indonesian, which should give the Jakarta group an extra boost. I'm
sure your presence, Sam, will be quite helpful, even if it's only over
the next couple days.<br>
<br>
As for regionalization, yes yes yes! Asia-Pacific has gone further
than most other regions in "approving" their own IMCs, which is
why the Jakarta site is able to be up in general. I really think
that's a good thing, as long as we're using the same or very similar
principles and criteria -- if not, I imagine there would be some
confusion. I still think every new imc would have to clear through
imc-process though before they're linked through the
<a href=3D"http://www.indymedia.org/" eudora=3D"autourl">www.indymedia.org</=
a>
site, so everyone can get a chance to get to know them before we all invite=
them into the network. I see no reason why Asia-Pacific can't=
"approve" local IMCs, sort of like the new-imc working group=
does, sending along their membership criteria and other stuff to=
imc-process when the imcs are ready. I'd like to see that kind of=
thing work in conjunction with the new-imc group, rather than separate from=
it, but I see no reason why Asia-Pacific couldn't take more of an active=
role.<br>
<br>
At one point Praccus was working pretty closely with the new-imc group to=
make something like this possible but communication has fallen off as of=
late. If anyone else is willing to fulfill that role, or if Praccus=
would like to revive it, there'd be nothing but enthusiasm from my=
direction. <br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Jay </font></html>
--=====================_22786484==_.ALT--