[IMC-Tech] Was: about the certificates

Alster alster at zeromail.org
Thu Mar 8 08:27:48 PST 2012


Hi Chris,

On 07.03.2012 13:46 Chris wrote:
[..]
> The witch hunt against me and the Mayday collective is partially
> documented here:
> 
> https://docs.indymedia.org/Local/ImcUkSheffieldChrisWitchHunt

you've now used several opportunities to state your point of view on
this matter. My impression is that *recently* nobody has objected to
your presentation of how things went then, in my case that's because
both I'm sick of the topic and don't see how it will help to keep
discussing it. I'm still writing now to say that, while everyones' view
on things is legitimate, your presentation does not provide a balanced
view, and others surely have different views.

This doesn't mean that I'm suggesting that yuo should not be able to
express your historiography, I think everyone should have a chance to
state their point of view, but recently you've both had and used this
chance way more than others have done which causes some imbalance on its
own. I'd like to ask you to consider for yourself whether continually
bringing up this topic is leading anywhere where anyone really wants to
go now.

I understand that you are convinced that you and or the Mayday group
have been unfairly treated (and I neither say that's the case or not
because I do not want to fire this, in my opinion, unrelated discussion
in this thread and at this point), trying to heat things up again by
continually stating an unbalanced view can in this place and in the
current situation can only make things worse in my opinion (though I
admit it would be a good strategy if the intention was to ensure this
project fails entirely now, but I will not claim this is your
intention). So please consider whether this is really leading anywhere
where anyone wants to go.

> But that isn't up to date -- it only covers the witch hunt up to the
> point before the Listwork groups started shutting down lists and the
> Docs working group started deleting users accounts on the wiki.
> 
> Subsequently we were forced to set up our own lists:
> 
>   http://lists.indymedia.org.uk/
> 
> And our own wiki:
> 
>   http://wiki.indymedia.org.uk/
> 
> Given the authoritarian actions if these global working groups last year
> I don't think they are worth saving. 

You're stating that the Listwork and Docs working groups have carried
out actions in an authoritarian way, and that they should thus not be
saved, so abolished. That's not what this discussion was about so far,
and while I would agree some things surely went wrong during the time
you are referring to, and that maybe it would have been better for those
tech (i.e. non-process) working groups to not carry out the decisions by
IMC process since there hardly was an IMC process at the time, I'd like
to ask you to not draw the current discussion, which has no direct
relation to the conflict you are referring to, into the direction of
what you want to discuss, since I do not think this is helpful for a
discussion on how to restructure the tech infrastructure / working groups.

On the other hand, as others and I have mentioned before, the - in my
opinion currently broken - IMC process surely IS a matter that can,
should and needs to be discussed by people who plan to working together
as a globally linked Indymedia - if that's the case. That's when people
try to reinstate an IMC policy. If and when this happens, it may be a
good idea to have an exemplary look at the recent conflict to analyze
what happened there and to learn from past mistakes. This would only
work, however, if the wounds this conflict has surely caused on all
sides have somewhat healed by then and people will be able to discuss in
a way which is not primarily driven by fully understandable but - for
the purpose of reviving something - discouraging emotions.

Some people are starting to get involved in continuing the tech work now
(and some may get involved in future policy matters, which, as you know,
involves a steep learning curve already), so that Indymedia *can* have
some kind of a future, so please do not burden this fresh sprout with a
mediation of a conflict which they have surely not caused and are not
responsible for.

Next to the need of reworking IMC process, I still hope that this
conflict you're referring to can be solved by the two sides initially
involved some day, possibly with a mediator both sides, as well as the
mediating party itself, agree with. If this takes place and it has made
some progress, and if this is something all sides involved consider to
be of use, I imagine some people of the two working groups you mention
could also get involved.

If you'd still like to continue this discussion at this point, may I
please ask you to do it on a separate thread?

Thanks for considering,

Alster

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-tech/attachments/20120308/1f3bc3d1/attachment.pgp 


More information about the imc-tech mailing list