[Imc-alternatives] Re: [Tikiwiki-devel] TikiWikIndymedia

[qwerty]

Hey magius,

I've been working on a very similar TikiWiki based project during the last one 
and a half year. It's called TikiMedia (http://tikimedia.org) and it's being 
used by athens.indymedia.org since the beginning of May 2005. There are quite 
a few structural changes to the classic Indymedia model and they seem to work 
pretty good. But the software is not mature yet. Some more features need to 
be implemented and some usability improvements are necessary.

I'm currently setting up the infrastructure to allow distributed development 
(issue tracker, darcs repository, support forums and documentation). I expect 
them to be pretty much ready in a week. Currently the tikimedia.org website 
isn't very rich neither does it have it's final shape.

The ideas you posted are interesting. If there are any developers that are 
willing to implement them on TikiMedia, I'll be glad to help.

I just subscribed to imc-alternatives at lists.indymedia.org, so we can continue 
the discussion over there.


On Friday 30 September 2005 22:17, magius wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On the alternatives at lists.indymedia.org list we're thinking to develop a
> new kind of indymedia website, all wiki-based. Here're are some initial
> ideas. Do you think it would be possible to customize TikiWiki so to make
> real these ideas?
>
> magius
>
> ps If possible I wish to have also integrated the "Projects" TikiWiki
> feature (TikiWiki 11.1 ?).
>
>
> Here's the message.
>
> > Hi Alternatives IMC,
> >
> > I've been thinking a lot lately about the kind of web site we want to
> > launch.  As we've discussed a bit on this list, and on IRC, is that one
> > of our main goals is to build a "next generation" Indymedia web site. 
> > Our IRC conversation was particularly inspiring to this end, as were
> > reading recents posts from Dru, Rabble, etc.  (links to all that are
> > somewhere in recent imc-alternatives e-mails, plus check out some more
> > recent stuff :
> > http://misnomer.dru.ca/2005/04/indymedia_past_and_future.html.)
> >
> > In this too long e-mail:
> > 1. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
> > 2. BASIC VISION
> > 3. NEWSWIRE
> > 4. CENTER COLUMN
> > 5. CATEGORIES (information structure)
> > 6. COMMUNITY
> > 7. THE END
> >
> > 1. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
> > The main question here is how we create an IMC-alternatives site that
> > will inspire site visitors to not only post information, but also become
> > actively involved in the project and in creating alternatives in their
> > own communities.
> >
> > One of the ways we can do this is by structuring the alternatives IMC
> > site to enable broader and more committed participation by site visitors.
> >
> >   [*** start a bit of basic background on indymedia sites, wikis and
> > blogs, which you can probably skip***]
> >
> > The standard IMC web site has three columns a left-hand column listing
> > the other IMCs, a center column composed of fixed features created by an
> > editorial collective and a right hand column featuring the open
> > newswire.  Some IMC sites present an edited newswire on the right-hand
> > column and provide a link to the unedited newswire.
> >
> > This set-up came into being before the popular use of Wikis and Blogs,
> > two interactive features that enable involvement from site users past the
> > choice to either join the editorial collective or post to the
> > newswire.  Wikis allow users to collectively edit a piece.  Wikipedia and
> > Wikinews use this format to enable their articles to come from what they
> > call “a neutral point of view.”  Blogs allow users to update on-line
> > interactive diaries, thereby offering an extended version of their own
> > view.
> >
> > To me, the inspiring thing about Wikis is that they offer a functional
> > infrastructure for seamless collective communication.  Wiki editing works
> > really well and I love to see how many people work together within the
> > wiki culture that has developed.  I feel the disadvantage is that the
> > neutral point of view sometimes seems to be composed entirely of
> > compromises, and that its often hard to get a grip on who composes the
> > group of people who are editing the article (as opposed to features
> > written by an IMCs editorial collective who, while they may not
> > individually sign each feature, compose a well-defined group of
> > individuals that, at least in theory, organizes transparently).  In my
> > opinon, the advantage of blogs is that they offer individuals the freedom
> > to functionally be the media; readership flocks to the more interesting
> > blogs.  The disadvantage is that bloggers often use the soapbox to blog
> > about anything and everything, so sometimes visitors have a hard time
> > finding focus in the information.
> >
> > In a way, the current set-up of most IMC sites is not too far from Wikis
> > and Blogs: we have the balance of collective editing (features/wikis)
> > with the ability of the individual to post (newswire/blogs).  Still,
> > Indymedia collective editing isn't as open and technologically functional
> > as wikis, nor do the open newswires allow site visitors to organize their
> > thoughts as coherently as they do in a blog.
> >
> > Also, while links in posts and features on the Indymedia sites act as a
> > gateway to other projects that offer background information, we've been
> > very ineffective in actively weaving the content of those sites into
> > Indymedia sites to enable us all to share resources and energy. 
> > Indymedia generally does a poor job of working actively with allies.
> >
> > Plus, IMC sites are more often general information sites than places
> > people come to build community.  Yes, a defacto “community” develops
> > around each local IMC site, composed of local IMC organizers, posters and
> > site readers.  But the basic setup of current IMCs does not invite users
> > to work together through their sites or really facilitate people
> > interacting with each other.  Maybe people communicate through article
> > comments, but there’s generally no space in the site to collaborate on
> > projects together.
> >
> > [*** end background gobbledygook***]
> >
> > 2. BASIC VISION
> > We’ve begun to envision an IMC Alternatives site that would be fully
> > interactive, functioning both as a place to post information about
> > alternatives and as a hub for communities working to bring them into
> > being.
> >
> > This “next generation” IMC site may not look too different from current
> > IMC sites.  For example, it would still have three columns.  The left
> > column would still have all the other IMCs listed, but would also feature
> > some navigation options (look at wikipedia.com for an example, or
> > socialforge.net).  The center column would look like the current
> > indymedia features column, though it would actually be a wiki space just
> > like on wikipedia with tabs for each page (article/source/discussion).  
> > The right column would still be a newswire, but . . . .
> >
> > 3. NEWSWIRE
> > An open publishing newswire, you say?  What a novel concept!
> >
> > Actually, we can easily envision the Alternatives IMC as having an open
> > publishing newswire that is similar to most current IMC newswires, but
> > with room for much more interaction and collaboration among site users,
> > collective members and allies.  For example, in addition to accepting
> > anonymous open postings, the imc-alternatives collective would invite
> > people around the world to syndicate their alternatives-related blogs to
> > the site.  If we want to get fancy, we could also offer blogging software
> > through the site, in essence offering to host people’s
> > alternatives-oriented blogs -- check out
> > <http://indyblogs.protest.net/>http://indyblogs.protest.net for
> > inspiration.  We could also work with allies to syndicate their content
> > to the newswires -- for example, if a magazine like Yes
> > (<http://www.yesmagazine.com/>http://www.yesmagazine.com) would be
> > interested in having its content appear on our newswire we would work
> > with them to figure out how to syndicate it.  (this would help them, I
> > hope, by directing viewers to their site.)  In addition, we could work
> > with IMCs to syndicate content from their own “alternatives” sections
> > –<http://nyc.indymedia.org/>http://nyc.indymedia.org, for example, has a
> > category called “alternatives,” and perhaps we could get that content,
> > and “alternatives” content from a hundred other IMCs, to shoot
> > automatically to the open wire.
> >
> > If we’d like, we could offer options on our newswire column: the open
> > wire and the “blogwire,” like
> > <http://nyc.indymedia.org/>http://nyc.indymedia.org does.  Or we could
> > just weave everything into one newswire.
> >
> > To further inspire collaboration and fluidity of content, when people
> > post to the open newswire, if this is technically possible, we can ask
> > them if they’d like their content to be fixed or collectively editable. 
> > If they pick the latter, their article will appear as a wiki page that
> > any registered site user can change.
> >
> > Also, again if possible, we could turn the whole newswire, in essence,
> > into a wiki.  Any registered site visitor would have the ability to hide
> > an article that does not meet the posting criteria -- specifically,
> > articles that don’t have to do with alternatives.  The site users/editors
> > wouldn’t be able to change the content of fixed articles or remove them
> > from the site, just remove the links of those that don’t have anything to
> > do with alternatives (“hide” the articles).  Like on wikipedia, the
> > history of the newswire will be available so we can revert to it in case
> > of vandalism.
> >
> > 4. CENTER COLUMN
> > As for the center column, as I mentioned above, we could make this a
> > collectively edited space that works like a wiki.  We’d have to talk
> > about whether or not, to avoid inevitable site vandalism, we would
> > require people who can edit the wiki to be a member of the
> > imc-alternatives editorial collective.  I’d be inclined to experiment
> > first with letting there be open access (perhaps with basic login/e-mail
> > verification), but with editorial collective members being notified
> > automatically every time the page is changed so we can keep up very
> > closely on potential vandalism.  (wikipedia may have less of a problem
> > with this; indymedia has active ideological opponents that take every
> > opportunity to hack us.)
> >
> > 5. CATEGORIES (information structure)
> > As for the general structure of the information on the site, we could use
> > the current alternatives feature as a template for Categories: economy,
> > society, etc.  When someone posts an article to the newswire s/he would
> > categorize it into one of the sections.  In addition to each of the
> > articles appearing on the general newswire, each of the sections will
> > therefore have its own, very focused newswire.  (click on society, for
> > example, and you’ll get the latest wikified society feature in the center
> > column, and the most recent society-oriented posts on the
> > newswire).  Again, all would have access to hiding/moving these articles.
> >
> > 6. COMMUNITY/ORGANIZING
> > This is all well and good – wikis, blogs and newswires, oh my!  But a
> > major part of our vision for the imc-alternatives site is that it would
> > not just be an information source, but a place for the community of
> > people working on alternatives to meet each other, interact and work
> > together.  We could therefore have forums set up as a place to discuss
> > issues as well as wikis to enable each of the site users to work
> > together.  They could use the site’s wikis to do anything from
> > collaborate on an alternative economic theory to organize in a very
> > practical way on very specific projects.   For an idea of how this might
> > work check out
> > <http://www.omidyar.net/home>http://www.omidyar.net/home.  They have
> > developed an active community of people using their site as a place to
> > work together to make change.  (check our their
> > “workspaces”:
>
> <http://www.omidyar.net/group/help/ws/workspaces/>http://www.omidyar.net/gr
>oup /help/ws/workspaces/).
>
> > I don’t know how open omidyar.net would be to working together to share
> > users and technology, but I hope they would entertain the idea.
> >
> > 7. THE END
> > So, what we seem to be building is not just a typical IMC site, but a new
> > type of IMC that functions both an information resource and an active
> > organizing tool.  It could be an exciting and vibrant place that will
> > inspire all kinds of participation, from the most basic posting of
> > alternatives-related information on the newswire to the most
> > collaborative active organizing through our blogwire, forums and wiki
> > pages.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > Jay
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Imc-alternatives mailing list
> > Imc-alternatives at lists.indymedia.org
> > http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-alternatives