[Imc-communication] imc-belgium disaffiliation proposal and where it is heading or isn't heading
christophe at indymedia.be
Mon May 16 04:41:27 PDT 2005
The communication list is indeed a bad place for such discussions.
Sorry for that, I lost my temper when I noticed that it was made
impossible to reply on the - sometimes very personal - attacks on
belgium.indymedia.org published on liege-imc.
The main problem here is that wiki pages and imc-newswires are full of
lies and attacks on imc-belgium volunteers and that imc-liège even tries
to prevent us from replying.
Even after the blocks imc-liège goes on with producing such pages:
Not only are these lists false they are illegal (in belgium at least)
If an extreme right wing party would produce them, we would bring legal
action against them. As a matter of fact the Belgian League for Human
Rights is starting legal action on such a case that is far less explicit
than what you can find in those wiki pages. But now we just have to
watch and see that this is becoming a normal imc-practice.
I would invite everybody to look through our archives. We always
consistently hide all attacks on other imc's. We've had plenty of texts
about imc-liège, uk, netherlands, sf etc... Some other imc's put these
attacks on their front page:
As said before this is indeed not a good climate to prepare for
Here you can see that my IP is blocked. I posted earlier a comment under
my name with this IP. So it has been blocked because it was mine.
On ma, 2005-05-16 at 11:35 +0200, turlututu wrote:
> Dear Christophe, dear Han.
> ### Contraction
> Christophe you said
> - that you published a comment without problem.
> - that you wanted to publish another comment after several days but it's
> wasn't possible for technicall reason.
> - that you can post with a proxy.
> So my question is: why don't you post with a proxy if it works ? There
> is no comment from you for the moment so i think you haven't really the
> intention to post something, am i wrong ? Here's your first contradiction.
> ### Edito policy
> About our edito policy, normally this kind of post
> (http://liege.indymedia.org/news/2005/05/4446.php) are hidden on your
> site because it's not an important information which concerns the
> public, instead of that, we copy/paste it on our forum so people can
> speak about it if they want. Our problem is that when we discovered that
> article, it had already 2-3 comments, so we decided to leave it because
> we didn't want to give the feeling that we shut up people who published
> these comments (the first comment was an critic to the article).
> Most part of people in the collective think that the censorship is not a
> solution because if you shut up people, they'll republish again and
> again until it becomes a spam, the other reason is more ethical, we
> think people have the right to give their opinion or critic (even
> against us), so i see no reason why we would "try" to shut up people of
> indymedia.be, it's a non-sense. It's a chance they are free to give
> their opinion/critics on our site, because on their site this is not
> possible anymore... It's not even rare that on their site some
> acceptable articles/comments are erased or even modified after being
> hidden, this is a kind of method we condemn because it goes totally
> against our principles, also it's one of many reasons which disgusted
> people who left that imc.
> ### Spam and trolls
> We ONLY block address which spammed our site but no address have been
> blocked since months because we don't have spam anymore (because we
> avoid the censorship as possible). So are you meaning that you was
> implied in one way or another with these spams ??
> Other belgian Imc can confirm that, some of indymedia.be play an active
> role of troll on several sites. So i won't be personally surprised if
> they are themselves implied with some spams on other sites. This is
> their usual double face: "they want peace publicly, but in private they
> make the war".
> For those who can understand the french, i propose you read this article
> and the comments under http://liege.indymedia.org/news/2004/04/1682.php
> "Marcel" is in fact Rosario (a membre of indymedia.be) which played an
> actrive role of troll on our site during months, like he leaves his
> email address (marcellario at skynet.be), we decided to send him a mail to
> ask him to stop, then he answered to us but he's trapped himself because
> he sent his answer with his real email address.
> Mail from Arnaud which asked to "Marcel" to stop his troll game on the
> Answer from Marcel with Rosario's email address:
> When Rosario discovered he used the wrong email address:
> Hope it will give you a nice example of their active role of troll...
> ### Diversion
> Your way to attack/defame other Imc's to avoid the mediation is really
> pathetic... And i'm probably not the only one tired of your little game.
> turlututu from Imc Liege.
> han at indymedia.be a écrit :
> >Hi Denis,
> >You might find this shocking and unbelievable, but it is the reality.
> >On liege.indymedia.org they block IP adresses from differrent people to
> >post on their website, they have been doing this for months.
> >They actulaly say this is due to spam received from this IP afresses.
> >(you seem te even be aware of this)
> >If you like you can come to our office and try to post a reply to all
> >the attacks on belgium.indymedia.org they post on their website.
> >You can test this one : http://liege.indymedia.org/news/2005/05/4446.php
> >You will notice this will only be possible by using a proxy.
> >I ame not sure if this mailing list is the right place for such
> >discussions, on that I agree with you.
> >The right place should be the liege mailing lists, but do I need to tell
> >you what happens with e-mails send to that list?
> >I find it rather strange that people feel they can publish attacks on
> >some IMC but prohibit that IMC from participating in the debate by
> >blocking all IP's used by people of that IMC.
> >Yet I agree with you that this kind of postings
> >blocking IP's,... writing reply's, spamming sites,... is not really a
> >good way to start "mediation".
> > han
> >On Sun, 2005-05-15 at 21:07 +0200, denis wrote:
> >>Hi !
> >>Le dimanche 15 mai 2005 à 19:46 +0200, christophe callewaert a écrit :
> >>>Hey all,
> >>>You can find a text on imc-liège about the desaffiliation procedure
> >>>against imc-belgium.
> >>>There is a long debate under it. I posted one comment to reply on some
> >>>questions. When one day later I wanted to reply on some more questions I
> >>>noticed that my IP-adress was blocked.
> >>>I get this message:
> >>>"Il n'est pas possible de publier pour l'instant à cause d'une surcharge
> >>>du serveur, d'un problème de base de données ou de spam"
> >>>(Translation: It is not possible to publish for the moment because of an
> >>>overload of the server, of a basic problem of data or spam)
> >>>There is nothing wrong with the server of imc-liège as I can still post
> >>>with a proxy. This is also not the first time they block Ip's of
> >>>imc-belgium volunteers or others who reply on their "you are a
> >>>stalinist!" campaigns.
> >>Do you like ping pong ?
> >>Sorry, but all this is only one moreover operation of diversion. The
> >>article is online, no comment was censured, no name and no contents were
> >>modified by the team of indymedia-liege.
> >>Not like that is practised all the day on your site !!!
> >>Your answer is present and nothing prevents you from writing others.
> >>Perhaps that certain addresses are blocked but then because of spams
> >>which took place on the site... but it is not censure, your answer is
> >>the alive proof: -)
> >>Thanks for not making us waste time with patethic diversions
> >>IMC-communication mailing list
> >>IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
> >IMC-communication mailing list
> >IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
More information about the IMC-communication