[axxs-sysadmin] John Howards left nut is calcified?

[Dave Fregon]

On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 02:01 -0700, mick lambe PARIAH wrote:
> The imc are still unable to explain why we are without a domain.

well then who is the 'imc' isn't that all of you? how do you air
grievances in IMC network? maybe looking at how that can be setup if
it's new ground, tho I think not

who are the imc you are wanting the explanation from?

> They are (demonstrably) an autocracy that operates without process 
> That's why our strike should be encouraged by progressives and
> autonomists.

see this is where I am confused, your an imc, they are an imc, every
group is an imc, and that makes the network. What method do grievances
between imc's get resolved is there in the network? other than
discussion lists, or is that just an example of lack of process? maybe I
am coming across as being ignorant, but really I do know people
understand these things, that's why I'm kinda putting it out there to
you from my perspective on the only way this can be worked out, and can
only improve the network and all in it. It should be easy to point to
these things.

How are decisions between all IMC's made?

I think if there is elements of the network that can grab or control
this, there should be a process for grievance or building one is the
primary importance then. I think progressives and autonomists would be
encouraging that direction especially from within the organisation,
there's quite a few there I'm sure, and thus solving your real problem.
It has to be done by somebody at some stage, it could be yourselves if
it just isn't there, and using your own experience. ie: get a process
for resolution agreed upon, and how a fair process would evolve to
resolve it, then follow it. If it can't be done, get out while you can,
coz you or others will never 'win'.

If there is no clear process, this is the area that should be worked on,
openly and for a result, and not just a result in this case, but for all
grievances to be dealt with.

I've seen the wiki's on the documentation site, they list the
grievances, but I can't see any process for airing them, or process for
resolution. Can someone point me to it if it exists? if it doesn't, why
not, and why not make one? Why hasn't there been an agreement put
forward over grievance resolution, and this case has just grown and
grown, and been thrown onto mailing lists to 'discuss'? I think what
both sides should do, is work out a resolution path with a clear end
that both agree to take and commit too, and walk it for good or bad. or
as autonomists and progressives we are just going to ask for it? it has
to be built, hence my point that I see it as a primary lacking part of
this whole thing, and I don't see any clear focus on it from either side
working toward that.

If Indymedia or parts are truly autocratic, then obviously an effort to
build this will bring down the powermongers quick smart eh, while
throwing stones at them up on a perch, nothing much changes except the
guards? I mean, if there's no framework or lack of it to be able to
abuse, if there's a process in place those individuals won't be able to
have the power. now that's progress.

Anyways as I said I'm not censoring, I put forward the request to move
the site or take down those posts causing us grief, as it's the only way
we are not going to be the piggy in the middle, and also vented as I
needed too after biting my tongue for a ages hoping it could be sorted
in Indymedia before my mouth started up, nothings has been pulled down,
and any move to a new server would still mean no downtime I'm sure,
there's hundreds of folk in indymedia, and a lot of them online too
funny enough, with servers hosting their sites I'm sure. maybe you can
find hosting in Indymedia circles? I'd be interested to know if you
can't. 

Personally, I'm just pissed that it's come to Indymedia members having
to bringing this to us to sort out, rather than creating or fixing the
element of the network that airs grievances and resolves disputes in a
definitive way. Otherwise, this is all going to happen again at some
stage, and tactics by both sides to force a resolution in their favour
could be used against you, as there's no process. Any group could have a
field day just locking everyone into a dispute, bogging down the whole
network in bullshit, and dragging everyone thru the mud, without any way
to deal with it unless you just give up and let them have their way
before the whole network is destroyed. Individuals could plaster the
whole network with misinformation, could sway something with no process
into doing their bidding just by sheer amount of argument irrespective
of facts grinding you finally into giving up. A clear process protects
all from all sides of a dispute taking advantage this way. I'm not
saying this is happening obviously, what I am saying is that without
process, I can easily see both sides can use each others methods here to
basically stuff up Indymedia regardless of the disputes right or wrong.
If your tactics work, so could any IMC force the rest to do it's bidding
due to people just not 'wanting to get involved in it', but with a
process agreed upon to clear resolution, that won't happen. (something
can also be unresolvable. you all have to agree at what point it is, and
what to do then). I know there's efforts to resolve this dispute, but I
think you all should also be actively working on a process irrespective
of the current situation, that can be used in future.

I dunno what to do but get back to you regarding it all,

Dave