[imc-baghdad] Web site

[christopher mitchell]

>I may be a lot naive on why the site can't be given an IMC address.  Who 
>makes the decisions

before a group can be given a link on the left hand column of the network 
IMCs, it must pass through the new-imc working group (agreeing to a number 
of terms including the principles of unity and demonstrating that they have 
been having open meetings, have reached out to the community and some other 
things).


>There are very good reasons why the server can't be in Baghdad and that is 
>through no fault of the group.  I am quite sure.. knowing some of them, 
>that the very first chance they have it will be IMC Baghdad.    & It is an 
>open forum for publishing..

Yes it is - but Indymedia is not simply open publishing (see below for 
longer explanation).  The location of the server has nothing to do with 
whether or not they can join the IMC network without going through the 
new-imc process - I'm not sure if you are implying that they are 
linked.  The server they use will not be in Baghad until at least they have 
the infrastructure to support a computer that is always on, always 
connected - but even then, why waste their resources on a server when 
hosting can just as easily be provided by other groups (most IMCs do not 
have local servers).


>Perhaps someone could offer a REALLY good explanation why not.  They are 
>not a business web site either (dot com indeed)

What it comes down to is that they cannot get an indymedia.org domain until 
they become an approved IMC - approved by the network via the mechanism 
(albeit flawed) of passing through the new-imc group and then being 
approved by the process list.

This process was developed to make sure that IMCs are formed in a 
sustainable way - some IMCs in the early days were formed by a small group 
of people who thought it would be neat, then they lost interest and the IMC 
website languished.  So in order for a group to join the network, they must 
demonstrate a commitment to the project.

Non of this is to suggest that the group in Baghdad isn't good enough or 
committed enough to be an IMC - that would be a ridiculous judgement.  What 
I am saying is that the process of becoming an IMC takes time and right 
now, I think the interest in Baghdad is to create indepedent news - not to 
worry about what international network they have to join to do it.   So I 
think we should support them as best we can - and when they are ready, they 
can decide if they want to go through the new IMC process.

As for now, they need support and a website.  The website is being provided 
by the folks at bristol IMC - and I have just purchased a domain name 
suggested by Ramzi - almuajaha.com
I got a dot.com because in my experience, com is the most widely recognized 
and though they are not a business, many non-businesses still use a .com 
address.

If someone else would like to register a different name - feel free!  You 
can do it via register.com or other services (many that are cheaper) - but 
since I spent my own limited funds on it (not group money) - I don't feel 
like I should be criticized for getting a .com ... if the group decides 
that it would be better to have a different name, then someone else or the 
group can get it quite easily ( the most you would have to pay is $35 a year).

I hope we can table this discussion of indymedia stuff for now - as I think 
we have more pressing things to discuss - such as how to get supplies/money 
to the people that are heading to Iraq...before they leave and we miss an 
opportunity.

cheers
--christopher