[imc-scotland-discussion] proposal to block proposals at imc-process once again
bencrosbie at gmail.com
Fri May 13 08:35:03 PDT 2011
I'm not inclined to want to support this decision to pull IMC Scotland from
the global indymedia collective in the near future,
The IMC UK thing hasn't been resolved and I don't think Scotland should be
making any rash decisions based on tensions that have arisen recently as a
result of this...
I find it a shame that IMC UK has come to the decision it came to and see it
as a failure of the consensus decision making process
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:23 PM, AB <anarchobabe at fempages.org> wrote:
> it seems to me that we should consider giving up/returning our imc
> to the global network. I can not see the global network functioning anymore
> with most local imc avoiding to participate at the global level and
> global imc seems to be less about allocating resources, which aren't there
> anymore, than passing some kind of dogmatic politics test.
> The dispute about imc uk is just the start, I believe, and the most elegant
> solution might be to get out of there before its getting really dirty.
> As people probably know the Mayday collective have pulled a copy of the imc
> database onto a new server and then the techie pointed the domain
> indymedia.org.uk to it. Global indymedia has no control over this domain,
> imc london demanded sanctions against the techie, denying him access to the
> servers and imc northern (england) sanctions against everybody in the
> collective (dunno who they exactly count to it) with denying anybody in the
> mayday collective any access to global indymedia resources.
> I have problems with both the proposals. The techie especially has been
> working hard since 2003 for indymedia putting a whole lot of time, money,
> energy and resources into the project, especially during times of crisis. I
> believe denying him server access is a revenge act more than the stated
> "inability to trust" as neither imc london or imc northern nor any other
> indymedia site -even imc uk original website - have been changed in any
> Secondly this is only going to harm the indymedia project as a whole and in
> particular the people who have now got more workload to do as they have to
> take over the work from him.
> Thirdly, I believe blackmailing somebody into submission is never a good
> to solve a dispute, but should be in particular discouraged in what I
> to be progressive, anti-capitalist and alternative politics.
> It also seems to me that anybody who is declaring sympathy or membership or
> support for the mayday collective is also endangered to get sanctioned in a
> way, therefore creating even fear to voice any supportive opinion within
> Fifth I do believe that Imc Birmingham, Imc Sheffield and the Mayday
> collective with their websites have been valid indymedia projects in all
> name only, with Sheffield existing since 2003 and Birmingham at least since
> about 2005, longer in existance than imc northern and imc linksunten who
> to be now the main dogmatic blockers. Both imc sheffield and imc birmingham
> collectives believed so much in imc uk that they never bothered to go
> the approval process. To exclude them from imc-process decision-making
> and block their approval by new-imc is in my opinion open discrimination.
> I don't want to be part of it but clearly imc scotland is unable to put
> right or resolve the dispute as its been running too long and too deeply.
> The only dignified way out seems to me for imc scotland to give up the
> imc membership.
> imc-scotland-discussion mailing list
> imc-scotland-discussion-request at lists.indymedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the imc-scotland-discussion