[Imc-communication] [Imc] UCIMC: Concern about the direction UCis going

Thu Sep 21 08:58:48 PDT 2006

woot,
sorry no translation but just wanted to join this idiocy.
ucimc as a collective does have the right to make decisions about how it 
acts. although, i personally do not agree with all their decisions, i 
understand it. we at big muddy are dealing with a similar dilemma. we wish 
to gain nonprofit status. our method has been to go the nonprofit 
association route rather than the nonprofit corporation route. we have still 
not completed that goal. ucimc opted for the more expedient method. our 
method is fraught with landmines. we have not been able to complete our goal 
as yet because of liability law changes and other isssues affecting 
associations that corps. do not face. we want to establish ourselves as a 
legal entity. you may ask why. that is a completely different discussion.
as a collective,  we feel that corporate status nonprofit or otherwise is 
not correct for us so we are trudging along with our legal efforts. ucimc 
decided this was not  as important an issue for them and so they did what 
they did.  if this is your issue with them than state it as such.
because of this choice, they have certain requirements they must meet. 
financial reporting is one of them. personally, i would use software i was 
familiar with to accomplish this. this appears to be what they did. i would 
also look to see if there were open source software available that i could 
eventually utilize to accomplish the same task. upon discovering such 
software, should it exist, i would than convert to using it providing i 
could train people who do the bookkeeping to use it. training is often 
problematical.
best
eric
bmimc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "deva" <drdartist at riseup.net>
To: <imc-communication at lists.indymedia.org>; <imc at lists.ucimc.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 1:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Imc-communication] [Imc] UCIMC: Concern about the direction 
UCis going


> Sascha was rude in a polite clever sort of way, and I gave back same,
> though less 'polite'. I am fed up with the condescending controlling
> sort of replies from UC-IMC folks, here, in email and especially on
> the UC website - Direct, I don't have a problem with.
>
> I agree that activists who do the work get to make the decisions. I
> am living far away from Urbana-Champaign and obviously have no
> involvement there. Yet here we are on this list which reflects some
> common shared purpose. If no person from UC-IMC posted to this list,
> things would carry on as they are, so you do not need to spend time
> and energy to defend yourselves.
>
> But perhaps you or others there want to do so, feel some
> responsibility to the shared vision, or want to maintain the respect
> of other imc people or for other reason.
>
> So here we are. UC-IMC is on its own path. You have to pay money to
> be a member, and it is having paid employment positions and has just
> accepted money from a state agency. Various people are upset/
> concerned about the choices and direction of UC-IMC and some wonder
> what sort of common vision and shared purpose is actually there.
>
> I have more I might say on these things, but the request has been
> made a couple times that this not be an english only discussion. I,
> unfortunately, do not speak spanish and have not yet found someone
> who can translate. I'll stop posting until I find someone to help me.
>
> deva
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2006, at 5:17 PM, Wendy Edwards wrote:
>
>> Actually, Sascha's been far more polite than I would have been.
>> The Finance people have gradually developed a set of procedures
>> to perform the tasks that allow us to remain afloat.  Although
>> we're willing to listen to suggestions, I really don't see
>> why we need to spend time and energy defending ourselves.  To
>> be honest, the people who do the work in activists groups
>> generally get to make the decisions, and that's what's happened
>> here.
>>
>> Wendy
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 05:01:20PM -0700, deva wrote:
>>> I don't know if you are an asshole, or have some sort of vendetta
>>> against me, but I'm telling you you misread my post. I did not accuse
>>> anyone of lying. Go read it again and figure it out.
>>>
>>> Your idea of engaging civilly and respectfully means subtle barbs and
>>> attacks with a facade of pleasantry. Maybe you learn this behavior in
>>> the corporate world, but I am not buying it.
>>>
>>> deva
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 20, 2006, at 11:43 AM, Sascha Meinrath wrote:
>>>
>>>> deva wrote:
>>>>> Do note that you misread my post. But nice try at going on the
>>>>> attack to deflect criticism. deva
>>>>
>>>> Deva, I'm not sure if you are simply trolling or if you have some
>>>> sort of vendetta against the UCIMC.  You said, "I don't think you
>>>> even bothered to look at the options boud suggested. You may as
>>>> well have just saved all the words you wrote and said 'We are not
>>>> interested in exploring such options at this time.'"  I'm telling
>>>> you that I was the one who looked at these options and that you
>>>> should apologize for suggesting otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> This isn't about deflecting criticism, it's about engaging civilly
>>>> and respectfully.
>>>>
>>>> --Sascha
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 19, 2006, at 11:12 AM, Sascha Meinrath wrote:
>>>>>> deva wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sep 18, 2006, at 2:00 PM, Mike Lehman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I do not know whether any of the free software packages you
>>>>>>>> mention were
>>>>>>>> available when we made the decision to use said software was
>>>>>>>> made six
>>>>>>>> years ago.
>>>>>>> So you did not  investigate alternatives back then? or you were
>>>>>>> not around then?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We did investigate alternatives and made the decision, based on
>>>>>> what we needed, to go with Quickbooks.  We had, in fact, started
>>>>>> with Quicken (which I was familiar with and had an extra copy
>>>>>> of).  We wanted to then go to a free and open source version, but
>>>>>> none did the type of classed accounting that we needed.  Over the
>>>>>> years we have looked for free open source alternatives every time
>>>>>> we've had to upgrade our accounting software (the last time being
>>>>>> in late 2003 when we switched to Quickbooks 2004 Pro).  I am
>>>>>> certain that the next time we upgrade we'll do the same search
>>>>>> and evaluation and, if a FOSS alternative is available, go with
>>>>>> that over Quickbooks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyway, we now have six years of financial
>>>>>>>> data that would need to be converted to something else in
>>>>>>>> order to
>>>>>>>> utilize freeware, assuming it is even appropriate. We have
>>>>>>>> plenty of
>>>>>>>> work to do without adding a large burden to achieve a result of
>>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>>> limited meaning.
>>>>>>> I don't think you even bothered to look at the options boud
>>>>>>> suggested. You may as well have just saved all the words you
>>>>>>> wrote and said "We are not interested in exploring such options
>>>>>>> at this time"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was the one who did these searches and I think you owe Mike and
>>>>>> the UCIMC an apology for claiming that folks were lying.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Sascha
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Sascha Meinrath
>>>> Executive Director  *  Principal          *  President
>>>> CUWiN              *** The Ethos Group   *** Acorn Active Media
>>>> CUWireless.Net      *  EthosWireless.com  *  AcornActiveMedia.com
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IMC mailing list
>>> IMC at lists.ucimc.org
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-communication mailing list
> IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-communication
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.6/453 - Release Date: 9/20/2006
>
>