[Imc-communication] [IMC-Tech] proposal to imc-process

[mark burdett]

Hi, it might be helpful to put some info in the contact db about the 
status of each site, e.g. currently a static site, newswire only, or 
whatever.  so when someone is researching the current status they 
don't have to waste time emailing various lists, etc.

we don't (currently) have status fields for all possibilities (just 
live or inactive, meaning list or don't list) but there is a comment 
field.

--mark B.

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 08:57:38 -0700, toya wrote:
> i dont know, but i think this kind of work shouldnt be done by a script.
> is a very good thing that you are doing this, but i think that this kind
> of work should be by contacting the collective and/or the people who
> maintain the server where the site is host..i believe they know way
> better then a script of what is up with the site etc.
> for instance i have notice 3 sites imc brasil host and the collectives
> from those sites asked us to keep it up for navegation and close the
> publish - because the collective was too disperse at the moment and in
> case other people want to read what was published at the site.
> so for removing a site we need to at least try to contact the collective
> and the people who is hosting it...nost just use a script....
> the script wont say those things..like andres was explainning about
> kenya indymedia web site.....
> bye
> toya
> 
> 
> Em Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 11:26:55PM +0100, Ben escreveu:
> > As explained on a follow up email sent to tech but sadly not  
> > communications, the first list I sent was made up of about 16 that I  
> > had checked by hand and the rest from an automated link validation  
> > script as I had grown tied of doing it manually. I should have  
> > checked the automated results as some sites simply did not respond  
> > fast enough for the script and were falsely marked as down. However,  
> > the important thing in my opinion at this stage is not the specifics  
> > of a final definitive list but rather an agreement on process to move  
> > forward to deal with the situation.
> > 
> > I'm keeping track of reports relating to the status of specific sites  
> > and collectives on http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/DeadImc
> > 
> > Ben
> > 
> > On Jun 15, 2007, at 10:10 PM, andr?s wrote:
> > 
> > > This clearly requires further research.
> > >
> > > For example http://kenya.indymedia.org/ was a recent recipient of
> > > international indymedia support during the Nairobi World Social Forum
> > > and is due to be more active in the near future, see
> > > http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-africa/ - but see also  
> > > http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-kenya/2007-May/0505- 
> > > xw.html ; and
> > > http://barcelona.indymedia.org/ is a very dynamic, well-run imc, and I
> > > cannot imagine how it comes to appear on such a list.
> > >
> > > andr?s
> > >
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > imc-tech mailing list
> > imc-tech at lists.indymedia.org
> > http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-tech
> 
> -- 
> .....
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-communication mailing list
> IMC-communication at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-communication