[Imc-uk-features] Re: Publishing server and server appeal

[Maqui]

>Hi
Crisc wrote:
>
>Makes sense, would could paste the text into the static
>solidarity page, but then we would lose any comments... So
>I dunno...
>
well, maybe that banner could just point to the feature an not to a 
static page. 

Whenever we decide that this feature should be removed from startpage 
special, then we just click it as "feature" and eventually it will go 
down the middle column until it dissapears. It can then be linked to that 
banner and keep the comments active, no?

>I'm not sure about using flash but a nice banner would be
>great :-)

Ok don't mind if its flash or not. I mentioned flash because the banner 
could have 2 or 3 sentences changing slowly , not to much in your face 
type of thing.

it could say something like:

First: Seize the Media, Not the Servers
then move to: IMC-UK needs new Servers
then: Please support our appeal (or something similar)
then: Click here ... or, More Info ... or, Go on, You'll Feel Great! :)

Problem is I don't know how to do these things. I can ask a mate that has 
done some banners for indy before, but if anyone in this list can have a 
go, maybe that would be quicker.

>Also there have been various suggestions about if an
>amount for the appeal should be set:
>
>- "I think a fixed sum should be set"  
>http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2004-November/1103-yh.
>html

>- "£500 a month"
>  
>http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2004-November/1103-51.
>html
>
>I don't know if there is a consensus on this so I didn't
>add this...
>  

Yes I know, I've been thinking the same. Although I see Chris's points, I 
personally also think that it's better if a sum is set for some of the 
reasons expresed in these mails, but still, it needs to be agreed before 
changing it in the feature. I think it is probably better if this sum is 
a bit too 'generous' than fall short later on. Also, if we mistake the 
sum agreed, the appeal can always be re-launched later on explaining why 
the ammount has been changed. I know this would not be very 
"professional" but then again, indymedia is often chaotic and always 
volunteer based. And I definitelly would not be too worried about 
appearing "amateurish and disingenuous" as chip mentions in one of his 
mails ... for me amateurism (is that a word?!) can sometimes be a bonus.

Anyhow, so my question is: who can decide on this quickly? ... I mean, 
the sum. I think the best it is probably if the tech crew could have a 
quick chat and decide on a number. I'd personally would go for whatever 
they decide ... surelly they could make a better decision than most of us 
(non tech humans :-))

I personally don't have any problem whatsoever if a group decides for the 
network on matters that refer to their specific area of work ... 
specially if the people in that group have repeatedly proved to be 
trustworthy. Obviously, then the network needs to be informed and 
decisions open to discussion and/or challenge. But at the end of the day, 
I don't think every single detail needs to go through a long consensus 
process before it gets done. Having said that, consensus decision making 
is still for me, the best and more fruitful way of making group (network) 
decisions, and the only possible way of deciding on fundamental network 
issues.

anyhow ... i think i'm rambling 

cheers

maqui
>
>-- 
>Aktivix -- Free Software for a Free World

>_______________________________________________
>Imc-uk-process mailing list
>Imc-uk-process at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-process
>