[Imc-communication] moderation on IMC-Process appears bias

[andrés]

ben dijo el 29/06/2005 22:54:
> If I understand you correctly you are saying, that the
> imc-process-facilitators didn't let your mails through?
> Are you talking about these two, which I received on the 26th (1.16h
> a.m.) and 27th (9.33h p.m.), just some hours, after they were sent: ?
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-process/2005-June/0625-y2.html
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-process/2005-June/0629-2o.html
> 
> If I am not wrong, please don't put unnecessary oil into a fire that
> shouldn't burn between us in such a way.

It's the second one, ben. You're seeing the date/time the mail was 
_posted_ (27th at 21:33 UTC+2 your time, 27th at 20:33 GMT+1 my time, 
27th at 12:34 PDT (Pacific daylight, am I right?)) on the imc-process 
listserver.

This mail was held for moderation, as you can see from 
imc-process-facilitate archives here: 
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-process-facilitate/2005-June/0629-px.html
(this is why transparancy is such a good thing, thanks!), and was 
finally delivered only a few hours ago.

However, I did see it arrive some (short) time _before_ this complaint 
was posted here.

That said, I certainly agree with your request for respectful dialogue 
and avoidance of flaming. Some time out in which to step back a little 
and cool down would be good.

Improving the way both new-imc and imc-process work is going to take 
time and effort, I see, and both are perhaps a little short of 
volunteers with time to dedicate at the moment, if I'm not mistaken.

Regards
-- 
andrés, canarias