[Imc-uk-process] san francisco indy troubles, part 2

[yossarian]

OK, 

I am still monitoring the situation in San Francisco.  For those not
aware, there was a nasty split in the San Francisco Independent Media
Centre (which I will call the "paleo-sfimc" here) resulting in a
"neo-sfimc" and an "sfbay" collective sharing the same territory.  The
dispute is still ongoing and has been since early autumn of 2003
(although the roots of it are probably much more deeply buried).  

I will try to write this as a reasonably objective report on what is
happening.  I am asking for help, because I think that this split is
having / going to have ramifications way beyond SF.  I would like to
request that : (a) someone else volunteers to take a look at this dispute
so I'm not the only one doing it, and (b) that IMC-UK starts a process to
come up with a position on the dispute that we think can help resolve the
situation in a constructive way, because two IMCs that have made some of
the biggest contributions to the network globally are in deep trouble.

I am suggesting that we should investigate the situation a bit, and send
one single message to each collective and to the imc-us-process email
list, endorsed by all of imc-uk, asking the neo-sfimc and sfbay
collectives what it will take to resolve the dispute and what they are
going to do to make it happen.  One plea:  please do not email the list
imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org about the dispute yourself, they have
enough trouble over there already without us each sticking our noses in
personally.  

So.

First, the background I've written up on the dispute is at...

http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2004-January/001629.html

...so there's not much point in repeating that part.  Since January, the
dispute has remained essentially frozen despite much bad-tempered
back-and-forth.  One thing I got wrong in that last report was that in
fact the url http://www.indybay.org, a central part of the dispute, was
not put into safekeeping ("escrow") with any global techs, that was
merely an offer which for a reason I can't fathom was never acted upon.  

THE CURRENT SITUATION

a) neo-sfimc is still demanding that the press passes apparently held by
sfbay people should be returned to the cops or verifiably destroyed as
they say "sf-imc" on them.

b) neo-sfimc says that as soon as this happens that the domain
http://www.indybay.org will go into escrow with neutral global IMC techs. 

c) indybay is currently talking this over within the group.  There has
been a request from their side that "Nessie", a member of the neo-sfimc
group, also verifiably returns or destroys his sf-imc press pass as
members of the sfbay collective are down in cop paperwork as being
legally tied to the press passes.

d) Nessie appears to have refused to do so, although the situation
changes minute by minute and it is difficult to say what will happen with
that.

e) There are a variety of other outstanding issues surrounding rent
money, equipment ownership, cross-linking of URLs from indybay to
neo-sfimc (which has happened) and neo-sfimc to indybay (which hasn't). 
These seem to be falling by the wayside as people get sick of arguing,
but they could spring back into vibrant life at any moment I'm sure.

My diagnosis:  like the Israelis and Palestinians they appear to be on
the verge of a breakthrough in negotiations.  Note that this diagnosis is
entirely sarcastic and I have absolutely no confidence that the current
situation will have any good outcome, which is why I am writing this
email asking for help.

WIDER NETWORK EFFECTS

Portland indymedia is still calling for the removal of neo-sfimc from the
Indymedia network, apparently a decision that they have reached consensus
on rather than merely the rantings of an individual.  Other people have
at various points chimed in (as individuals) also demanding the removal
of neo-sfimc, apparently without the sanction of their home collectives
and not acting in any official capacity.  It remains to be seen
whether/when this will turn into an actual political force that will
engender a split within the wider IMC scene, but there is a potential for
this.  Considering the (thankfully) underdeveloped nature of any
national-level groupings in the US, it seems to me quite likely that any
wider conflict over these issues are going to be played out at a global
rather than a US level.

I have the feeling that a lot of people besides me are quietly watching
the situation.  The bottom line for many of these unseen watchers is
likely to be a perceived abuse of tech power -- the neo-sfimc collective
includes many people who are well-known in global tech circles, and the
fact that this collective is essentially holding the domain name of their
adversaries hostage as a bargaining chip in their local dispute is bound
to stimulate the egalitarian / anti-hierarchical impulses of a wide
cross-section of the Indymedia movement globally.  This is where I see a
real possibility that the ensuing discussion could easily get out of
control; the whole global network exists in a technical sense due to the
efforts of people like the dedicated techs of the neo-sfimc, but there is
always a tension in every local collective between the techs, who can get
certain crucial stuff done, and the less technically inclined, who
sometimes feel that they are in the humiliating position of having to beg
techs to get things to happen. Because this tension exists throughout our
global network, I am concerned that there will be unpredictable
consequences if the neo-sfimc / sfbay dispute is not handled (a)
relatively soon, (b) in a way consistent with the core Indymedia
statement of principles, and (c) diplomatically, that is, without
stimulating further conflicts elsewhere.  I believe that we in IMC-UK can
play a positive role here.

The imc-us-process at lists.indymedia.org list is a total disaster.  It is
basically a forum where each side is attacking the other;  it has
degenerated to the point where a set of photos shot by an sfbay
photographer and reposted to neo-sfimc, accompanied by some stupid
comments about that photographer, elicited no less than 50 (!) emails in
a massive flamewar this past weekend.  Now, personally I'm almost certain
that it was probably the FBI or a rightwinger hoping to cause further
divisions, diminish the effectiveness of the two imc's, etc;  that both
sides fell for it and and slopped more crap over each other only shows
how raw feelings are, and how both sides have basically stopped thinking
about the wider political context that they are in.  

SUGGESTIONS

My tentative suggestion about all of this is fairly simple:  we should
send a single email to a representative of each collective, and to
imc-us-process.  This email could inform each side that

a) we of imc-uk view their dispute as having more than local significance
b) that we would like to express our solidarity with them and help them
go forward from here
c) that we would like them to explain to us in calm, clear language how
they view the current situaton
d) that we are interested to hear what constructive steps they feel can
be taken to resolve the situation
e) that any responses should come through a single liasion for each
collective
f) that individual responses of the subsequent imc-uk discussion from any
member of either collective will result in the banning of those
individuals from all imc-uk lists.  I suggest this because if we don't
make this clear right up front the volume of shit which would rain down
on us all through the magic of the internet would stun us all into
inaction and disgust.  The archives of imc-us-process for March 2004,
which isn't over yet, are 122KB, and every message is devoted to one side
or the other slagging the other; there is no other subject of discussion
on that list.  By comparison, the March 2004 archives of imc-uk-process
are 54KB as of today.  

I think that any communication we have with the participants in the
dispute, and/or others, should go through liasions, and that no member of
imc-uk should jump into any discussion, however innocent it might seem at
first, with individuals on public lists.  If you don't understand why I
think this, please start reading through the emails on imc-us-process in
January, and contine through all 1000 of them until today.  We need to be
very strategic about how we approach this thing.

I am unclear as to what we would do after we got their responses, but I
felt I should bring this to the attention of imc-uk again as I feel that
it is an important issue and could cause problems for the global network
unless it's resolved.  I do think that we are running a big risk if we
get involved in this thing, as it could detract from our other, more
constructive efforts, but since this has been going on very publicly for
many months without an end in sight, I think it is time that we see if we
can do anything about it.  Whether this involves talking to other groups
within the global imc is an open questions, I have no idea if there is
any opinion on this dispute in other European IMCs, the South American
IMCs, etc.

I have not spoken to anyone in either neo-sfimc or sfbay in the
preparation of this report, it's all entirely my own opinion.  Interested
to hear peoples' responses, I don't expect that there will be any fast
action on this and perhaps it will all resolve itself before our
discussion within IMC-UK is finished, but I am by this time having major
doubts about it.

Yossarian

ps the archives of imc-us-process are a good place to start your own
investigation of what is going on, they are at

http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-us-process/

January is a good place to start, just dive in randomly. 


-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different