[Imc-communication] Uruguay and the PoU / Principios de Unidad

[deva]

how is it another discussion? concerns and blocks have been raised... 
is not the correct path to then address them?

I like the principles of unity...

I would say the idea of a diffuse network is closer to reality. How 
many people who regularly contribute to Indymedia actually know what 
goes on on global lists? How many people can actually explain how 
$30-50,000 were allocated by IMC finance? and so on...

But maybe Indymedia looks different from different places. It is not my 
idea that I want it that way, but rather that is what it looks like to 
me. That is the direction I see it heading. More diverse and more 
diffuse. I hear some people express their vision of where they want to 
see Indymedia go, and it is far away from my vision. I am not saying my 
vision is the 'right' one, just that I see that increasing gap. Maybe 
that is okay too, but it looks to me like there is difficulty to face 
it in a conscious way.

Anyway, it is beautiful outside, and I am going to go to the farmers 
market and buy some fresh food for dinner

:-)

regards
deva
portland imc contributor


On Jun 7, 2005, at 4:04 PM, Libertinus wrote:

> ok deva but that's another discussion.
>
> the problem now is the word "draft" and is funny when lot of lot of lot
> collective like us had to accept it like oficial criterias.
>
> Your idea of indymedia like a "diffuse network" not agreed with the 
> reality.
>
> Libertinus ______________________
> http://uruguay.indymedia.org
> http://www.fotolog.net/libertino
>
>
> Mensaje citado por deva <drdartist at riseup.net>:
>
> | UK has temporarily withdrawn their proposal as it was blocked by a
> | couple imc's and there has been no discussion of concerns raised by
> | other people.
> |
> | One concern is regarding POU #9
> |
> | 9. All IMC's shall be committed to the use of free source code,
> | whenever possible, in order to develop the digital infrastructure, 
> and
> | to increase the independence of the network by not relying on
> | proprietary software.
> |
> | One imc asked for clarification on the meaning of whenever possible.
> | Their request was never responded to.
> |
> | Another concern is POU #5
> |
> | 5. The IMC Network and all local IMC collectives shall be
> | not-for-profit.
> |
> | What does not-for-profit mean? For some it means people do not get
> | paid, for others they interpret it in such a way that they can make
> | indymedia their career and have a regular salary. Goodwill Industries
> | is not-for-profit and the CEO makes $700,000 per year.
> |
> | There needs to be discussion of these matters and more honest dialog
> | about where various interests want to take indymedia.
> |
> | regards,
> | deva
> | portland imc contributor
> |
> |
> |
> | On Jun 7, 2005, at 2:22 PM, Libertinus wrote:
> |
> | > [ Castellano ] (Original)
> | >
> | > Quienes participamos de Indymedia Uruguay, creemos que los 
> principios
> | > de unidad
> | > y
> | > criterios de membresía han sido la forma para diferenciar cuáles
> | > colectivos
> | > forman parte de la red y cuáles no; estas reglas ya se han 
> legitimado
> | > y creemos
> | > que deben dejar de ser considerados como borrador. De hecho acordar
> | > con ellas es
> | > la única forma que conocemos para formar parte de la red Indymedia;
> | > así lo han
> | > hecho decenas de colectivos desde el año 2000.
> | >
> | > En este sentido planteamos la rediscusión de los mismos, para
> | > ajustarlos a las
> | > nuevas realidades. Todos los colectivos deberían llevar a cabo esta
> | > discusión,
> | > como forma de que ningún particular o sector se apropie de los 
> mismos.
> | > Nosotros
> | > somos los dueños de nuestras propias reglas.
> | >
> | > Estos criterios no deben ser vistos como algo fijo, sino que 
> deberían
> | > se
> | > revisados en la medida que la red lo necesite. Esto asegura la
> | > flexibilidad y
> | > el crecimiento.
> | >
> | > A su vez. consideramos estos principios no como una herramienta 
> para
> | > expulsar
> | > colectivos, sino como medio de lanzar las discusiones que han sido 
> los
> | > mecanismos fundamentales para mantener la libertad y la estructura 
> de
> | > red
> | > horizontal. Si algún colectivo se aparta drásticamente de ellos, no
> | > debería
> | > haber un grupo policial que lo reprima, sino que la propia red 
> debería
> | > discutir
> | > y decidir en cada caso.
> | >
> | > Las reglas claras, también, ayudan a los colectivos a resolver sus
> | > dinámicas
> | > internas y a su vez también pueden servir para evitar el mal uso de
> | > esta
> | > poderosa herramienta, por parte de aprovechadores y oportunistas.
> | >
> | > Es en estos términos que apoyamos la propuesta de United 
> Kollectives.
> | >
> | > (Para la discusión utilizamos las posiciones de Holanda, París, 
> Lille
> | > y Sydney.)
> | >
> | > CMI Uruguay
> | > http://uruguay.indymedia.org
> | >
> | >
> | > ===========================
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > [English]
> | >
> | > We, who take part of Indymedia Uruguay, believe that the 
> Principles of
> | > Unity and
> | > the Membership Criteria  have been the only way for differentiate 
> which
> | > collectives are part of the Global Network and which not; those 
> rules
> | > have
> | > already been legitimated, so we think that we should stop consider
> | > them as
> | > "draft". To be in agreement with them is the only way we know to be
> | > part of
> | > Indymedia; thats the way dozens of colectives have done since 2000.
> | >
> | > In that sense we propose the re-discussion on this Principles of
> | > Unity, in order
> | > to adjust them to our new realities. All collectives should have 
> this
> | > discussion, as form of which no individual or sector appropriates 
> of
> | > the same
> | > ones. We are the owners of our own rules.
> | >
> | > This criteria don't must be seen as something definitively
> | > established, they
> | > must be reviwed as much as the net needs it. This assures our
> | > flexibility and
> | > our growth.
> | >
> | > As well, we consider the PoUs as a way to come up with the 
> discussion,
> | > witch has
> | > been the fundamental mecanism to keep freedom and the horizontal
> | > network's
> | > structure and not as a colective's expeling tool. If any Indymedia
> | > collective
> | > separates drastically from them, should not be a police group that
> | > suppresses
> | > it, would be the proper global network which discuss and decide 
> about
> | > every
> | > case.
> | >
> | > Clear rules, also help collectives to solve their internal 
> dynamics and
> | > problems, and they are able to avoid the bad use of this powerfull
> | > tool by
> | > opportunists.
> | >
> | > On this terms, we accept the United Kollectives's proposal.
> | >
> | > (We used for the discussion the positions of Holland, Paris, Lille 
> and
> | > Sidney.)
> | >
> | > IMC Uruguay
> | > http://uruguay.indymedia.org
> | >
> | >
> | >
> | > _______________________________________________
> | > IMC-communication mailing list
> | > IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
> | > http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-communication
> |
> | _______________________________________________
> | IMC-communication mailing list
> | IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
> | http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-communication
> |
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-communication mailing list
> IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-communication