[Imc-communication] (EN)(ES)UCIMC: Concern about advertisements for Giga-$ non-free software companies
Aaron Couch
acouch at phillyimc.org
Sat Sep 23 11:09:31 PDT 2006
Firstly I think this is an important conversation and I would chalk up an
'flame-war' feel of the discussion to how passionately everyone here feels
about the network.
I also think that UCIMC's successes are a good benchmark to talk about where
the movement is 5+ yrs from its inception.
It is too much to sum up so will jump into a couple of points.
Indymedia is at a crossroads as the network has gotten so large and the
publishing itself has changed since '99 and is about to take some much
greater leaps and bounds.
Couple o' points:
+ Open publishing, the hallmark of the indymedia revolution, is no longer
remarkable as blogging and social network sites have become common place.
+ Some Indymedia's like Portland and IndyBay have had great success
following very closely to the original model with large amounts of content
and traffic
+ The majority of Indymedia's in the US have very few features published. An
informal count (see results below) show that almost 3 out of 4 IMCs in the
US have had less than 5 'features' in September.
+ Several IMCs like UC, NYC, and Philly (and there are others) have worked
to create more permanent structures such as 501(c)3 status to further work
within their communities.
Indymedia's in different cities have by necessity taken different approaches
and I think that we should support this. I am not sure what else we can
expect from such a decentralized and autonomous network.
Philly had a model, at least in terms of the website, like Portland's, but
similar to many of the IMCs that have low #s of features we weren't getting
much traffic or posts to our newswire.
We have changed our focus to creating a website that appears less like a
blog, as well as creating structures and working groups that can better help
us work with the communities we are trying to empower.
I think this reflects some differences of perspective of organizers here,
but also the difference in the activist scene as well as overall culture
between Philly and Portland.
I laud the work of UC-IMC but also empathisize with the difficulty between
figuring out efficiency versus the ideal. That is a struggle we all grapple
with individually on a daily basis and as a network we will always have to
think about.
But I will argue that we need to embrace these different models as we move
forward.
(see results of my survey of publishing in the US below)
best,
-Aaron
Aaron Couch
Philly IMC
# IMC # of Features in Sept 1 POR 70 2 IndyBay 23 3 NYC 20 (est) 4
Miami 19 5 SANT 18 6 PHL 17 (48 if u count news briefs which are same as
many IMCs features) 7 SEA 15 8 LA 12 9 AUS 10 10 Bos 8 11 RV 8 12 CLE
7 13 COL 7 14 AK 4 15 AZ 4 16 Balt 4 17 MIN 4 18 BM 3 19 MIL 3 20
ROCH 3 21 SB 3 22 HUDS 2 23 NM 2 24 NOLA 2 25 OK 2 26 RICH 2 27 SB 2
28 CHI 1 29 HOU 1 30 NJ 1 31 BUF 0 32 HI 0 33 IDA 0 34 ITH 0 35 ITH 0
36 KC 0 37 MAD 0 38 ME 0 39 NC 0 40 NH 0 41 PIT 0 42 STL 0 43
44
En primer lugar pienso que esto es una conversación importante y marcaría
para arriba una sensación del ' flame-war con tiza ' de la discusión a cómo
cada uno aquí se siente apasionado sobre la red. También pienso que los
éxitos de UCIMC's son una buena prueba patrón para hablar de donde está 5+
el movimiento años de su inicio. Es demasiado a resumir así que saltará en
un par de puntos. Indymedia está en una encrucijada pues la red ha
conseguido así que grande y publicarse ha cambiado puesto que '99 y es
alrededor tomar algunos saltos y límites mucho mayores.
Puntos de los pares o ':
+ el publicar abierto, el sello de la revolución del indymedia, es un
notable no más largo pues los sitios de red blogging y sociales tienen lugar
común convertido.
+ algún Indymedia como Portland e IndyBay han tenido gran éxito el seguir
muy de cerca al modelo original con cantidades grandes de contenido y de
tráfico
+ la mayoría de Indymedia en los E.E.U.U. hace muy pocas características
publicar. Una demostración informal de la cuenta (véase los resultados
abajo) que casi 3 fuera de 4 IMCs en los E.E.U.U. han tenido menos de 5 '
características en septiembre.
+ vario IMCs tiene gusto UC, NYC, y Philly (y hay otros) ha trabajado para
crear estructuras más permanentes tales como estado 501(c)3 para trabajar
más lejos dentro de sus comunidades.
Indymedia en diversas ciudades tiene por diversos acercamientos tomados
necesidad y pienso que debemos apoyar esto. No soy seguro qué más podemos
esperar de una red tan descentralizada y autónoma. Philly tenía un modelo,
por lo menos en los términos del Web site, como Portland, pero similar a
muchos del IMCs que tienen punto bajo # s de características que no
conseguíamos mucho tráfico o los postes a nuestro newswire. Hemos cambiado
nuestro foco a crear un Web site que aparece menos como un blog, así como
crear las estructuras y los grupos de funcionamiento que pueden mejorar nos
ayuda a trabajar con las comunidades que estamos intentando autorizar.
Pienso que esto refleja algunas diferencias de la perspectiva de
organizadores aquí, pero también la diferencia en la escena del activista
así como cultura total entre Philly y Portland. Alabo el trabajo de UC-IMC
pero también empathisize con la dificultad entre calcular fuera de eficacia
contra el ideal. Eso es una lucha nosotros que toda ataca con
individualmente sobre una base diaria y pues una red nosotros tendrá que
siempre pensar alrededor. Pero discutiré que necesitemos abrazar estos
diversos modelos mientras que nos movemos adelante.
(véase los resultados de mi examen de publicar en los E.E.U.U. abajo)
lo más mejor posible,
- Aaron
---------
On 9/22/06, stacy at cat.org.au <stacy at cat.org.au> wrote:
>
> (EN) Hi all,
>
> I agree that it is unfortunate this discussion devolved into a flame
> war, and diverted it from the real issue at hand. I also agree that
> the people who do the work usually make the decisions. But I don't
> agree that this always results in the best decisions.
>
> The thing I really loved about indymedia was the fact that you really
> don't need a big bureaucracy, lots of money, or property to run a
> successful one. So implying that all those things are necessary to
> 'keep us afloat' is disturbing to me. They may be necessary to keep
> the chosen structure of UCIMC afloat, but in terms of the larger
> network, I fear that they will do more harm than good in the long term.
>
> As an example, no money has been distributed to the collectives for a
> couple of years now (the Brasil money just went thru the global
> account, but was donated directly to them). Money donated to the
> global account was supposed to benefit collectives in the global
> south. I'm sure that there are plenty of projects that could benefit
> from that money, but none have applied. The reasons for this could be
> many, but I'm sure they all involve a wariness of the hoops they must
> jump through to get it. As an example, apparently you now have to
> give your hoome address and the name and address of your employer in
> order to receive an international money transfer.
>
> So this money has not actually been to the benefit of the network, but
> it has helped to build a bureacratic entity in Urbana Champagne which
> represents the entire network with regard to finances.
>
> I am personally very disturbed by the idea that this situation can be
> allowed to progress. I would like to see the money which was donated
> to the network, being distributed to the network, not sit in a bank
> account, bolstering another bureaucracy of the global north.
> Unfortunately, my attempts to do so have been blocked, with no way
> forward proposed to replace it.
>
> So, I have now retreated back to working exclusively on local indy
> collectives, and lost faith in the ability of the global collectives
> to function.
>
> Stacy
> imc-arizona
> imc-sydney
>
> (ES) Hola a tod at s,
>
> Estoy de acuerdo que este discusion desfortunamente bajo a una guerra
> de palabras, y ahora no discutimos el asunto real. Tambien estoy de
> acuerdo que la gente que haga el trabajo usualmente hagan los
> decisiones. Pero no estoy de acuerdo que este resulta en los
> decisiones mejores.
>
> Lo que me gusta de indymedia era que no necessita burocracia grande,
> mucho dinero, o propiedad para organizar un collectivo exitoso.
> Entonces, para decir que estas cosas son necessitos para mantenernos,
> me molesta mucho. Quizas estos cosas son necessitos para la estuctura
> escojido de UCIMC, pero para la red en general, tengo miedo que van a
> lastimarnos mas que ayudar.
>
> Por ejemplo, nada de dinero han dado a los collectivos hace unos anos.
> (el dinero para Brasil pasa por la cuenta, pero estaba donado
> directamente a ell at s) Dinero que estaba donado a la cuenta mundial
> intentaba para beneficiar los collectivos de la Sur Mundial. Estoy
> seguro que hay muchos proyectos que puede usar este dinero, pero
> ningun se lo pidieron. Los motivos para este serian muchos, pero
> estoy seguro que todos involucran tener miedo de los procesos que
> tengan que pasar para ganarlo. Por ejemplo, ahora, una persona tiene
> que dar su direccion personal, y el nombre y dirrecion de su empleador
> para recibir dinero mandado internacionalmente.
>
> Entonces, este dinero no es una beneficia al red, pero assiste en
> crecer una cosa burocratica en Urbana Champagne que representa todo
> del red en asuntos de financias.
>
> Me enoja la idea que este situacion sigue adelante. Queria ver el
> dinero que recibio la red, distribuido a la red, no parado en una
> cuenta apoyando una mas burocracia del Norte Mundial.
> Desafortunatamente, yo trate hacerlo, pero fue bloqueado, con ningun
> sugestion para processo alternativo.
>
> Entonces yo regrese a trabajar con los collectivos locales, y perdi fe
> de la poder de los collectivos mundiales para funcionar.
>
> Stacy
> imc-arizona
> imc-sydney
>
>
> Quoting Wendy Edwards <wedwards at uiuc.edu>:
>
> > 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
> >
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-communication mailing list
> IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-communication
>
--
Aaron Couch
Philly IMC --> http://phillyimc.org
Greenadelphia! --> http://greenadelphia.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-communication/attachments/20060923/3d4717ac/attachment.html
More information about the IMC-communication
mailing list