[IMC-Boston-Editorial] i did not hide the Mobe article: pete read
this
Pete Stidman
pstidman at yahoo.com
Thu Nov 3 13:43:22 PST 2005
Point taken,
She said it was a woman and you were involved in the
discussion, I assumed it was you.
I disagree that the duplicate should be hidden. That
is the one I improved with Eve's response and the
article should not have been hidden in the first
place.
Therefore we owe it to the original author to let it
have a run in the newswire.
This has noting to do with "our past relationship,"
it's merely a dialogue about this particular post.
-Pete
--- Sofia JarrinT <sofiajt at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Pete,
>
> Two very important things:
>
> 1) I did not hide the article. All maintenance I do
> on
> the site is done with my name "sofiajt" instead of
> an
> alias, especially so there's no confusion on what I
> do/don't do.
>
> 2) There are 2 articles on the site. The original
> one
> under the name "Boston Mobilization and E-mail
> Tracking" with all the comments on it which I went
> ahead an unhid earlier today (see Editorial &
> Discuss
> list). The second one "Boston Mobe and Your
> Privacy"
> is a duplicate post by Shadow when he/she saw that
> we
> had hidden the 1st article. The duplicate should
> remain hidden.
>
> Pete, given our past relationship I deeply resent
> that
> you would imply that I hid the post. Did Eve tell
> you
> she talked to me (by name)? Did you ask her? Or did
> you assume because she talked to a woman and decided
> to take advantage of the opportunity to point
> fingers
> before the general mtg. this sunday?
>
> I'm just saying in my opinion, questioning your
> sources well would have been better.
>
> --Sofia
>
> --- Pete Stidman <pstidman at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > I don't have time to read the volumes but
> hopefully
> > this will address all concerns. Eve Lyman, who
> > heads
> > up Mobe is OK with my solution of posting her
> > response
> > with the article that I have now unhidden.
> >
> > I think we owe it to the authors to let it fly a
> > full
> > run. It was hidden for most of it's time in the
> > newswire. Community accountability goes all ways,
> > not
> > just for Mobe.
> >
> > I agree with Jamie in essence, dissent in the
> > community is a good thing. Our best reaction to
> > these
> > sorts of things is to investigate and come up with
> a
> > story that informs. In this case I think Eve's
> > response helps for a quick fix.
> >
> > >From what Eve told me, Sofia, you did not ask her
> > whether the allegations were true or not, you just
> > asked her if it had come from Mobe. When she said
> > no,
> > you hid it, and I don't think that was the best
> > reaction. SOmething needed to be done, so it was
> > good
> > of you to catch it, I'm just saying in my opinion,
> > investigating it would have been better.
> >
> > -Pete
> >
> >
> > --- "visnusdream at juno.com" <visnusdream at juno.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > i just want to say I'm glad there is some nice
> > > discussion going on about these issues.
> > >
> > > Sofia, I think the lack of of "documentation"
> you
> > > mentioned is a significant problem. It has come
> up
> > > repeatedly. Unfortunately, I have no suggestions
> > > about how to solve it. We need a data base that
> is
> > > well organized, and search-able. I'm just not
> > > management savvy enough to even know where to
> look
> > > for the available software, nor do I have the
> > skills
> > > to invent it.
> > >
> > > As you rightly point out the rules are clearly
> > > stated on the site; but when this latest article
> > > became an issue, one person made the point that
> we
> > > can delete whatever we want and we don't have to
> > > explain it. Although I respect the BIMC's right
> to
> > > do that, I think we should make every effort to
> > > explain our actions. I am posting the editorial
> > > guidelines from the site at the end of this
> > message.
> > > None of them applies to the MOBE article.
> > >
> > > I don't even like the article; I think it was a
> > > ridiculous point to make. However, I agree
> > > wholeheartedly with tree monkey: we should feel
> > > compelled to explain to our contributors, with
> > > coherent statements, about why any particular
> > > article is deleted or hidden.
> > >
> > > There is quite a bit of criticism of MOBE on the
> > > site, but there is also a lot of criticism of
> > > ANSWER, the communists, the socialists, the
> > > capitalist, and the anarchist block. Whether we
> > like
> > > it or not, the site is most frequently used by
> > > activists and they are likely to bring their
> > > differences of opinion to this forum. As long as
> > the
> > > information is accurate, we should not get in
> the
> > > middle of these disputes, anymore than we should
> > try
> > > to curb the dissemination of accurate but
> > > politically damaging information about the
> > > President.
> > > In a democracy, criticism is healthy.
> > >
> > > If we don't let people post negative things
> about
> > > MOBE, how will MOBE's leadership even know these
> > > questions about their ethics are of concern to
> the
> > > community?
> > >
> > > Think about how different things might have
> turned
> > > out if the IMC forum would have existed,
> providing
> > a
> > > space for engaging conversation, during the last
> > > years of the Black Panthers, when the FBI was
> > > destroying them with subtle internal propaganda.
> > > Part of the reason some of those tactics were
> > > effective was because there was no single place
> > were
> > > the rank and file members could come together to
>
> > > discuss the pertinent issues with other members
> of
> > > the community.
> > >
> > > IMC helps break down barriers and hierarchies.
> > When
> > > a vibrant discussion is taking place, with lots
> of
> > > different opinions being expressed, even if I
> > think
> > > the topic is trivial, I believe it is in the
> best
> > > interest of all to allow the discussion to
> > continue.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm glad that we were able to have this
> particular
> > > article re-instated.
> > > Love,
> > > Jamie
> > >
> > > We have consensed on hiding the following types
> of
> > > posts:
> > >
> > > 1. Hate posts; posts that explicitly express
> > sexism,
> > > racism, homophobia, or other forms of prejudice.
>
> > > 2. Threats of Violence.
> > > 3. Slanderous or libelous material.
> > > 4. Personal attacks or insults.
> > > 5. Advertising.
> > > 6. Pornography.
> > > 7. Duplicates or extremely similar posts.
> > > 8. Disruptive or provocative material clearly
> > > intended to impede constructive activity on the
> > > site.
> > > 9. Misinformation.
> > >
> > > We have consensed on deleting these kinds of
> > posts:
> > >
> > > 1. Any hate posting that also carries media such
> > as
> > > photos, audio or video clips (to prevent the use
> > of
> > > our server as a linkable storage space)
> > > 2. Any post by an individual known by Indymedia
> to
> > > have consistently acted in a disruptive manner
> and
> > > that the collective has unanimously identified
> as
> > a
> > > sabateur.
> > > 3. Stories, pictures, video footage or other
> > > material that could potentially incriminate or
> > > otherwise endanger activists.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Boston-editorial mailing list
> > > Boston-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
> > >
> >
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-editorial
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home
> page!
> >
> > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> > _______________________________________________
> > Boston-editorial mailing list
> > Boston-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
> >
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-editorial
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in
> one click.
> http://farechase.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Boston-editorial mailing list
> Boston-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-editorial
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
More information about the Boston-editorial
mailing list