[Imc-alternatives] [content] AltIMC.org editorial group

[Jay]

Hi all,

Just like we had a small group of people discuss and propose a design 
for the Alternatives site, meeting in IRC meetings and keeping 
everyone on the main e-mail list updated, we don't have to have 
everyone on this list involved in every tiny discussion about 
editorial policy and the final wording of the taxonomy categories.

So, I suggest we start an editorial group.  I certainly volunteer to 
be on it, and from the sounds of it, Strypey is game too.

Would anyone else out there like to be on this group?  This would 
finally be your place for 100% content-focused, non-tech discussions 
about the Alternatives project!

Strypey, when are you going to be free from the recent pile of work 
you talked about?  As soon as your schedule clears up, let's get 
moving on this.

cheers!
Jay


At 10/14/2008, you wrote:
>Kia ora koutou
>
>As I mentioned in my other email about getting the solutionswire
>working, we need to draft an editorial policy for the site. I have
>created a page for this on our wiki, and made a tentative start
>(suggestions welcome):
>http://www.openplans.org/projects/imc-alternatives/editorial-policy
>
>Some other resources that might be useful in helping us write this
>policy, and some of the issues it needs to address...
>
>Here's is a basic editorial policy that has been distilled from the
>various local IMC editorial policies, to guide new IMCs in writing theirs':
>http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/BasicEditorialPolicy
>
>...and a list of some local ed policies (disturbingly short, given that
>every approved IMC is supposed to have one and publicly display it):
>http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/EditorialPolicy
>
>Because we are a topic IMC, rather than a local IMC, as well as laying
>out our implementation of open-publishing, our ed policy will need to
>include criteria for deciding which stories fit our topic, and which do
>not. This will need to evolve over time, and I'd like to see an area of
>the site (a wikipage, or forum topic?) dedicated to ongoing, open
>discussion of the issues it raises.
>
>To guide us in drafting our policy, I have started looking for policy
>documents for existing topic IMCs. The BiotechIMC are listed in the 'imc
>list' on the global site, so I presume they have been through the
>new-IMC process. They only have a mission statement on their site:
>http://biotech.indymedia.org/en/static/mission.shtml
>But this seems to be their editorial policy from the docs wiki:
>http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/BiotechEditorialPolicy
>
>The only other topic IMC I am aware of is the ClimateIMC, which I
>presume has not been approved by IMC Process. I tried to find the
>editorial policy for the ClimateIMC but they don't seem to have any
>reference to one on their site:
>http://www.climateimc.org/
>
><off-topic> I believe human industrial and agricultural activity is
>contributing to climate change, but I know a number of well meaning
>activists for many good causes who disagree. The question is far from
>settled among the broader alliance of radicals/ revolutionists/ liberals
>that have traditionally co-operated in the Indymedia movement. An IMC
>site on the topic of climate ought to facilitate respectful, productive
>debate, and mutual education, not use the respect earned by the work of
>Indymediatistas over they years to propagate a narrow, ideological position.
>
>The ClimateIMC collective seem to have an explicit agenda on their
>topic, and use their editorial powers to remove any content that
>disagrees with their position. In my opinion, the ClimateIMC site as it
>stands is not open-publishing by the Indymedia definition, and should
>not be using the IMC names or logos.</off-topic>
>
>The reason I mention this, is that we are going to be walking a even
>finer line clerking the solutionswire. For example I can anticipate
>people trying to use the wire for anarchist vs. marxist flamefests, or
>revolutionist vs reformists flamefests. When we hide these, we must be
>able to refer to an ed policy that objectively distinguishes between
>ideological debates, and protest politics on the one hand, and practical
>solutions on the other hand.
>
>This could get tricky, take for example an article contrasting forms of
>protest that are more open to public participation, and achieve
>something practical (eg open rescues of factory farmed animals) with
>forms of protest than are elitist and token (eg smashing car windows at
>night in a working class area to protest "car culture"). The very
>existence of our topic site that there are more practical forms of
>resistance than protest. Yet, the more open, participation-orientated
>protests could be defined as 'solutions' in the field of direct
>democracy, or civic participation.
>
>In summary, our policy needs to describe as precisely as possible how
>AltIMC.org will pursue its goals, while operating in harmony with the
>Indymedia founding values of pluralist co-operation among diverse
>networks of activists for global justice.
>
>RnB
>Strypes
>
>--
>BTW Fight the 'Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement'!
>http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display/76066/index.php
>
>"Whether gods exist or not, there is no way to get absolute certainty
>about ethics. Without absolute certainty, what do we do? We do the
>best we can."
>- Richard Stallman
>http://www.gnu.org/philosophy
>
>http://www.creativecommons.org.nz
>http://www.indymedia.org.nz
>_______________________________________________
>Imc-alternatives mailing list
>Imc-alternatives at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-alternatives