[Imc-alternatives] sharing

[lancaster-imc at riseup.net]

Chuck, good points too. I am really busy right now, but keeping up with
this idea and reading/thinking. Michaelv

> A few criticisms. I'm very much for openness and transparency, but there
> are some significant issues which limit how much a radical organization
> can be "open."
>
> Aaron Kreider wrote:
>> I wonder if it'd be useful to get a small group of people to write up a
>> short manifesto calling on activists and activist organizations to Share
>> as much information as possible?
>
>> What Should be Open
>> -all your publications  (books, videos, leaflets, images, etc)
>
> I'm generally for this and think that more publishers should make their
> content available as much as possible. Making content available publicly
> broadens the audience for your materials. Too many projects are so
> restrictive that it actually ends up hurting themselves.
>
> On the other hand, the needs of organizations to recoup costs involved
> with publishing projects *has* to be respected. A smart organization
> will make available excerpts and individual pieces from their published
> content right after publication. But organizations have every right to
> embargo the release of the rest of new content if they need to make
> money to recoups costs.
>
> One of the things that hurts all publishing these days, especially
> radical publishing, is the idea that everything should be available for
> free. If my project gives away everything for free, how are we going to
> raise money to cover the costs of creating that content? We are already
> face to face with that hurdle with our publishing project. We don't have
> the capital to get our publishing project off the ground. We don't want
> to run advertising on the website. Most of us are underemployed or
> unemployed. We don't have a pool of wealthy liberals that donate to us.
> We don't have access to trust funds like other radical publishing
> projects have access to. Disinformation.com funded their publishing
> project with a million dollar payout from a lawsuit. The ISO draws on
> hundreds of thousands of dollars that was given to them in the form of a
> stock gift.
>
>> -all your programming code that you produce (or hired consultants to
>> produce)
>
> Don't have a problem with this.
>
>> -internal organizational documents that would be of use (ex. fundraising
>> letter, strategic plan, budget)
>
> Generally, this is a good idea, but there are some limitations. Given
> that we are radical media projects which are subject to repression from
> the state and legal sanctions from corporations, there is just some
> stuff that groups shouldn't share. I'm a big transparency advocate, but
> there are some limitations, given the current political climate.
>
>> This fits with the IMC vision as IMC sites are already sharing.  And it
>> fits with our goal of including networking in a future imc-alternatives
>> site.  As more and more activist networking sites appear, we need to
>> mobilize thousands of grassroots activists to take a strong stance in
>> favor of sharing data - otherwise organizations won't make it a
>> priority.  In the ideal future, organizations will prioritize sharing
>> and integrate it into their websites from day one.
>
> I'm skeptical about sharing data and information with other projects.
> It's not a two-way street.
>
> Chuck
> Infoshop.org
> _______________________________________________
> Imc-alternatives mailing list
> Imc-alternatives at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-alternatives
>