[New-imc] NC-IMC's plan of action

[Harry Halpin]

Global Indymedia folks,
	Okay, here's NC-Indymedia's plan of action as discussed at our
meeting last thursday. This mostly deals with the nuts and bolts of having
a regional web-site.
	We have already set-up ActiveSF, the active that's currently being
used by SF indymedia - sf.indymedia.org. We will plan to use activeSF's 
categorical features "i.e. you can put your features in a distinct
category" ability to have on the left-bar a features column that sorts
features by city. The cities currently will be "Alamance, Chapel Hill,
Charlotte,Durham, Greensboro, Raleigh, Wilmington" with maybe "Asheville" if they
don't have an IMC. Then every post can be put in its proper geographical
loation. All posts will be on the main NC page, but then a user from a
particular city could just click on their city and get only their
city/region-specific posts. 
	While the main IMC working-group responsible for the page should
be in Chapel Hill (which is in the middle of the state and a half an hour
drive from Raleigh, Durham, and Alamance), other IMC working-groups may
form in other parts of the state (most likely Greensboro, Charlotte,
Wilmington, possibly Greenville and Asheville). These working groups must
abide by the same editorial policy and points of unity that the original
Chapel Hill IMC group formed. If they do, they are an official IMC working
group. They will be subscribed to our listserv to which all meeting
minutes and proposals will be sent and we will try to meet
with all other groups, if they form, face-to-face biannually to discuss
NC-IMC. Proposals which effect the entire IMC (like eliminating a city to 
the features, adding a city to the features) should be approved over the
internet with a one week wait for discussion. All other decisions should
be made locally. 
	I believe that while the editorial policy, points of unity, and so
on of the CH-IMC which were submitted for proposal are the same, another
document detailing the regional nature of the IMC and how different IMC
groups may communicate should be submitted for approval. Once this is
approved (please soon!!!), we'd like to take the name nc.indymedia.org
and rename ourselves and our documents NC-INDYMEDIA if our group at the
next meeting can finally hash that out. However, first we want to know if
that proposal works with global IMC, assuming we write up another document
for submission to new-imc.  

				Thanks,
					Harry 

On Sat, 18 May 2002, Brian Conley wrote:

> Hey Harry, Sharpie here from the Central Florida IMC, and hopefully soon
> the Florida IMC as well... We have been discussing the creation of a
> florida statewide imc project, and i wuold definitely support you in north
> carolina as long as i could have some assurance that you were truly
> organizing on a statewide level... i'd love to talk to you and pick your
> brain for ideas that you folks have for making it work as well as offering
> info about how we're working things here, some discussions about remote
> meetings, etc...
> 
> TO THE NEW IMC WORKING GROUP
> 
> I know that Chapel Hill is pretty close tobeing accepted i belive(actually
> werent they accepted back on the 22nd??) anyway, I just wanted to say that
> I'd be willing to step up and be their support person as they transition
> to being a statewide project(if that is indeed what happens) I think this
> makes sense as I'm already helping out several otehr southeastern imc
> projects including Redhills/Tallahasse IMC and Charleston IMC...
> 
> anyway, what are other folks thoughts about a statewide imc in north
> carolina? what we have discussed here in florida is more a spokesbody type
> organization where the fl imc, if created, would inevitbaly be a body of
> representatives from otherlocal imcs around the state as well as folks who
> dont have local imcs, and one of its primary functions would be to
> encourage the creation of other imcs all over the state and eventually
> pushing out into alabama, louisiana, georgia, etc
> 
> sharpie
> 
>