[imc-northern] Feature Proposal + hiding

libjf at riseup.net libjf at riseup.net
Fri Jan 28 06:08:38 PST 2011


I agree with protag.
The first 303 article was hidden because it places individuals in danger.
This is not hidden because it does not.

Let's feature that other one though! aces.

Jen


>
> Hi
>
> I'd like to 2nd the feature proposal 1311. It's not perfect but it does
> have much to recommend it.
>
> Re. the other item (generally) I feel I have already disengaged. I tried
> quite hard a while ago (when it was being discussed on closed lists) to
> indicate ways in which people who disagreed with each other might move a
> little in one anothers' direction, to at least show a bit of willing and
> keep the process of finding consenus alive, but it just seemed mired in
> intransigence to me.
>
> As far as the recent item (1313) goes, I don't feel the need to distance
> myself or ourselves from it. I wish its criticisms were worded a bit more
> carefully and generously,  but basically it's tapping balls into a series
> of open goals (which didn't need to be left open).
>
> Just to give an example, when the Gateway 303 story was first mooted the
> obvious implausibilites were pointed out. That's not to say the story
> isn't
> true: just that people would doubt it and subject it to ridicule if it was
> not supported with some really good evidence. And therefore it would be in
> the interests of those wishing the story to be taken seriously to do some
> work on that. Those making this case were basically dismissed (and, to a
> degree, insulted) as if they were saying that they themselves didn't
> believe that cops were posting stuff on Indymedia, rather than what they
> were actually saying: some readers would sieze on the IP filtering
> (whatever) aspects of the story and make that the news, to the cost of
> Indymedia as a project generally, and not be especially impressed with the
> revelation of the (to them) bleeding obvious. One of the reassurances
> provided was that the story did not depend just on the gateway 303 IP data
> but that lexicographical analysis of the text in the comments could be
> presented which would show they were the work of one (or a small group of)
> individual(s). It's a pity that hasn't been produced.
>
> If the 1313 article was attacking activists (by name) I'd be for hiding
> it, as that's plainly not OK. I don't think anyone* doubts the good
> intentions of the people who worked on the Gateway 303 story. But by
> rejecting crticisms made in private they have chosen to receive that
> criticism in public. And for me the 1313 story at least saves the effort
> of
> Northern conjuring up some kind of position statement which would merely
> re-iterate our oft stated position on anonymous publishing (and which
> would
> then become a target for more criticism...)
>
> I might think differently if I felt, as you do, that the author(s)
> "designed [the article] to create more mistrust" - I don't think it reads
> like that, I don't think they had that intention - my assumption is that
> they have good intentions and I think that's a plausible interpretation.
>
> Hey, I might be wrong, who knows.
>
> Cheers
>
> Protag (still wishy-washy after all these years)
>
>
>
> *Except Jimdog who thinks some of them are very naughty boys :)
>
>
>
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:49:42 +0000, nab at aktivix.org wrote:
>> With the pictures I propose we feature
>>
>> articles/1311
>>
>>
>>
>> Also I'd like to go on record saying I'd like something on
>>
>> articles/1313
>>
>> distancing ourselves from this or hiding it.  I think it is designed
>> to create more mistrust between people and like D. said, I want to
>> disengage.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> nab
>> _______________________________________________
>> imc-northern mailing list
>> imc-northern at lists.indymedia.org
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-northern
> _______________________________________________
> imc-northern mailing list
> imc-northern at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-northern
>





More information about the imc-northern mailing list