[IMC-Boston-Editorial] New Editor/ Thinking out loud
sofiajt at yahoo.com
Wed Mar 8 06:28:25 PST 2006
thanks for centering the article. AWESOME picture. where'd you get that?
Ie, new editor, I agree that I would like everyone who is an active member (including those that are kind of in hiatus, like svea, sharpie, andrew) to weigh on this. Although in the past, it was the Editorial team that "made the decision" on who was and wasn't an editor, I agree w/both you & Jon. It should be done thru a consensus process with the group
I just don't want to wait for all of us to meet in order to decide because it seems we just aren't able to meet... too busy, heh? And we need the help sooner than later.
Ie, censorship. You know, I don't remember hiding anything from bender, which is kind of funny. But if I did, I'm glad she/he was able to voice her/his opinion in a constructive manner instead of saying "this sucks!!" what sucks? the article, h-fries, bimc, the decision, sofia?!
Ie, identities... Separate aliases helps us know who is hiding what when. It's an internal check-and-balances system so for example you, can call me on what happened w/bender... It's important.
Ps: sharpie, svea. See link for new proposed editor:
"visnusdream at juno.com" <visnusdream at juno.com> wrote: I centered the IAC article. If someone disagrees, please just move it. http://boston.indymedia.org/feature/display/56482/index.php
Let me know what you think of the picture.
I have reservations about the new editor but am willing to work with you on it. I think the idea should be brought before some of the long standing members, privately and on the discuss list. I also feel that when we approach our tech group to add the new person that we ask their advice before we ask for the person to be added. I think we need to respect the general body by giving them an opportunity to at least comment on or even block the proposal. Please, do not present the issue as something the editorial group has already decided on. I am hesitant and willing to stand with you only if other people like the idea, but I am not at that point yet. In addition, if the person is going to be added, I think they should agree to come to at least the next two meetings. IMC is a culture built on relationships. Sometimes those relationships are strictly on-line but thus far this person is completely foreign to us and the IMC collective.
I love the disclaimer revamp idea. Is there a lawyer we could have look at this?
What ever happened to changing the wording of the "Local interest" check-box?
Finally, Sofia I appreciate the nice way you handled hiding some of the pro-abortion ban comments by "bender," but I could not find the original comment. I am wondering what you will do with her latest post:
There is a double standard. If a pro choicer posted something like "Stop those damn bastards." Sofia would let it stay up, because she's biased. However when I post that I agree with the ban, she disrupts my post, calling it disruptive and then informs me that MY opinion must be well reasoned and intellectual in order not to be oppressed by her.
This is an unreasonable and deliberately scheming attempt to squelch discussion, and bogusly portray an illusion of consensus -- a flaw of such a system.
Anyway, to appease her highness, my well reasoned argument in favor of the ban is that it will provoke a final decision in the supreme court which may ultimately result in a more practical and humane application of Roe v Wade, wherein all abortion is banned after the first trimester, and parental notification is mandated, forcing irresponsible young women to get on the ball and make a decision in a reasonable amount of time.
After this is in place for a while it will finally stifle the bogus scare claims that all kinds of women are going to die from not being able to take 9 months to murder their fetus.
Anyway, I would leave it but wonder if you will.
I also thought about this idea that we are all have individual identities as editors. I wonder if it might be more effective to just act with one nomenclature. How did the idea of each person having a seperate alias came about? I think we might be able to generate a few stock phrases for comments and then all use the same name. It might quiet some of the personal animosity but would perhaps make us seem more bureaucratic. What do you guys think? Is knowing who hid something important? Maybe the trade of isn't worth it
Peace and censorship,
Boston-editorial mailing list
Boston-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Boston-editorial