[New-imc] Fwd: Jakarta IndyMedia - Seeking Clarification and Advice

[n ik]

heya gang,

this discussion IMO is a good one to be having,
couple of things i'd like to discuss...

first is the straight out practical question of how to proceed - 
basically jakarta (a functioning site AFAIK) wants to be listed on 
the sidebar generally. Jay and Boud seem to be saying that they 
(new-imc?) want the forms filled out, and a few other things covered 
- like open email list, etc. Sam seems to be saying that the email 
list et al side of things is not likely (in fact, could be 
counter-productive), and the forms are time-consuming and not 
essential - in fact, he goes so far as to suggest that there be 
alternatives to filling out forms, like a vouching system, and 
regional decision making about new-imc's

me - i think that filling in forms in a means to an end, and should 
not be considered *mandatory* (esp. considering many imc's never went 
through this process - melb is a case in point). it was only ever 
(AFAIK) set up to aid the formation of new imc's and maintain some 
form of control over what becomes an imc. so, in the first instance, 
i think rules are only as good as their exceptions.

on this point i think (and it seems) that getting correctly and 
completely  filled out forms from jakarta indymedia is unlikely 
(sam?) b/c of tech & time issues, and suggest that a vouching system 
be used - if they have been hanging with sam (who is there to see how 
they work / help if he can), and have been dealing with praccus - and 
both of them are satisfied, i fail to see what the problem could be 
apart from  a bureaucratic fixation with protocol   :-)   and i dont 
think indymedia in general has a bureaucratic fixation with protocol. 
I understand that people want to have a fair system, and the feeling 
that everyone should go through the same process, but i think that 
this ignores the very different situations that many imc's are 
operating under (the same goes of the email list etc issues - 
security issues, and methods of organising collectively differ from 
region to region,and need to be taken into account, with the 
understanding that it is people in that locality or region that 
probably understand the situation and how to respond to it best).

secondly, as this comes back to the regional network in operation in 
oceania, many of us down here think of the current system of 'global' 
collectives / decision making bodies as counter-democratic in some 
sense. the reasons for this have been listed again and again on the 
global lists, and so i dont see any reason for going into them again 
(and this isnt some anti-anyone rant, just a comment based on the 
idea that participatory structures have *size* limits, as well as 
access & *speed* limits). imc-melb (as well as both me personally, 
and quite a few of the oceania kids AFAIK) feels that 'global' 
indymedia should be little more than a chorus of voices of local 
imc's - some of us like the direction the global page is heading in 
(ie, the 'newswire' of features, etc), and think that indymedia 
should continue in this direction. one step would be to move decision 
making on new imcs to a regional level where possible, and then make 
the global side bar an aggregate of all of the local / regional 
sidebars...

oceania is moving towards a situation (IMO) of regional autonomy - 
which is a positive step. some oceania members participate in the 
global groups (though not as much as perhaps they would like), but i 
think it would be easier, and more productive, for oceania kids to 
work regionally to build and maintain the indymedia network (this is 
happening at the moment with local crews working with jakarta with 
tech, org and money, and has happened with aotearoa, brisbane, and 
adelaide)...

nik


>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



>The main thing this regional group would need to do is update the sidebar and
>also create subdomains off the main domain. I have CC'd this to Nik
>(fragments at va.com.au) who is involved in this regional group - which I
>understand already has a list operating - imc-australasia at lists
>
>My suggestion is that there is a process for regional decision-making and
>acceptance of new regionally located Indy sites - based on regional needs.
>These can be set up locally - ie. on one of the servers in the region (cat,
>octapod...) or maybe a request can be made to the US. But the decision-making
>should be done regionally.
>
>Also, I would suggest that 'vouching' be used. Rather than getting a group to
>make a proposal and do a lot of paper pushing, if someone from an 
>existing Indy
>collective goes to that group and can see that there is a real 
>desire to have a
>Indy site - that should be adequate.
>
>I am not too sure where to go with this - except to say that it 
>would be really
>fantastic to accept jakarta.indy in to the indy network. At the moment,
>independent media makers are fairly restricted. There are many community radio
>stations that operates illegally, and the government has 30 year 
>jail sentences
>for these operators. Currently, there is debate in parliament whether licences
>should be allocated to community radio - but there is resistance from the
>government who fear further 'disintegration' of indonesia.
>
>Meggy and the others around are really trying to foster the idea of 
>free media -
>  and they see jakarta.indymedia as playing an important role... But with it
>having a .au suffix and not being on the sidebar makes things a bit difficult.
>And it was their idea - they made the initial proposal many months ago. It
>wasn't like someone from Melbourne is encouraging them to set up an Indy site!
>I think their initiative should be supported!!!
>
>Hokay - leave it at that for now. I am hoping that others at imc-australasia
>takes up this discussion especially about regional decision-making in terms of
>new-indy websites.
>
See ya, Sam :)

-- 
we do not lack communication, on the contrary we have too much of it. 
we lack creation. we lack resistance to the present.