[New-imc] recertification process

Sun Oct 13 08:10:35 PDT 2002

Hi,

 >perhaps someone on the new imc working group could suggest if we need to 
do every step.  i'm >thinking of sending in the automated form for 
example?  but maybe we should?  perhaps some folks >could comment on that?

If we ever do an "audit," my sense is that an existing IMC wouldn't need to 
bother with filling out the newimc form, but instead should go directly to 
the membership criteria.  If they can respond favorably to all the points 
of the membership criteria, they're in decent shape.  We should also ask 
for information about outreach they've done, since we've been asking that 
question to aspiring IMCs for a few months now.  Also, an introduction 
would be in order, since we ask new IMCs to do that too.

I would hope having to fill out all the points of the membership criteria 
will inspire some essential discussions in long-term IMCs, discussions that 
perhaps haven't happened yet.  Or, in the case of IMCs that are in turmoil, 
discussions that potentially could lead to resolution of conflicts.

Jay

At 10/11/2002, Sheri Herndon wrote:
>hi new imc wg,
>
>it's been a long time since i've jumped into the mix, but i do follow all 
>the great work.  thank you!
>
>i wanted to just share with folks some of what people have been talking 
>about in terms of this "recertification" process or what some people have 
>called the imc "audit".  for those of you who like history, particularly 
>when it's indymedia history, this idea originated in san francisco during 
>the press freedom/indymedia gathering in april 2001, nearly 18 months 
>ago.  at that time, when we were all consensing as individuals to the 
>principles of unity and the membership criteria and the new imc working 
>group was JUST beginning, it was brought up that to be fair and equitable, 
>the older imcs should also go through this process.  everyone agreed.
>
>this was brought up on the new imc list by myself shortly thereafter and 
>at that time, it felt like there was already enough work for the working 
>group to take on, let alone do this "audit".  over time, what we've come 
>to (many different folks at older imcs) is that individual imcs will start 
>the process on their own and do it voluntarily.
>
>i've made a proposal to the seattle imc that has been announced a few 
>weeks ago and then again a more formal discussion will happen this coming 
>tuesday at our next general meeting.  we all are pretty much in agreement 
>that this is a good thing and that it will help us do some evaluating and 
>reflecting and also to go through the same process as every other 
>imc.  there are other imcs who have said they want to do the same.
>
>we will send out an announcement to the liaison lists letting folks know 
>about our decision and that we're going to plunge in and do it.
>
>perhaps someone on the new imc working group could suggest if we need to 
>do every step.  i'm thinking of sending in the automated form for 
>example?  but maybe we should?  perhaps some folks could comment on that?
>
>many of us in seattle are actually excited about this because it will only 
>be good for us to have to go through the process and since we were the 
>first imc, it makes sense that we should set a good example.
>
>i hope that helps answer a few questions and i'd love to hear what the 
>core new imc working group folks think in terms of the process for older 
>imcs and if it should be identical or should have some slight modifications....
>
>peace
>sheri
>seattle imc
>
>At 8:45 AM +0200 10/11/02, Bart wrote:
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>Hash: SHA1
>>
>>anna heeft geschreven:
>>| hello new-imc working group,
>>|
>>| are there any details on the recertification process for any IMC's
>>(that were
>>| in existence before the new-imc process), and have any IMC's initiated
>>| said "recertification" process?
>>
>>Hello Anna,
>>
>>We discussed this idea here allready a couple of times. We never really
>>started doing it. We only kinda "force" old imc's to go through the
>>process if they start with a new collective. (Prague, France, Cleveland,
>>...).
>>
>>If you need more info, feel free to ask the list ...
>>
>>Bart
>>
>>
>>|
>>| anna kakazu
>>|
>>|
>>|
>>|
>>| _______________________________________________
>>| New-imc mailing list
>>| New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
>>| http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc
>>|
>>|
>>
>>
>>
>>- --
>>"Intellectuals are the shoeshine boys of the ruling elite" (Killdozer)
>>
>>http://indymedia.be     |     bart at indymedia.org
>>http://thepits.be       |     bart at thepits.be
>>http://pseudopunk.be    |     icq: 48682266
>>
>>gpg --keyserver keys.indymedia.org --recv-keys be196251
>>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
>>Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>>
>>iD8DBQE9pnOYPhTKOkQE2V0RAokwAJ9N53FqoXCLt5i+FdVW99JhV1C0LACgkQgN
>>jjhNNCYQM7/N/cJ98FqUxXc=
>>=VnqI
>>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>New-imc mailing list
>>New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
>>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc
>
>_______________________________________________
>New-imc mailing list
>New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc