[Imc-uk-features] Editorial guidelines (was Re: hidden)

[ekes]

ad_nauseam at riseup.net wrote:
> On reflection, you're absolutely right that non-news would be a better
> label. However it is still promoting hierarchy, even if it isn't strictly
> speaking a posting from SWP/Socialist Party/whoever. There is a
> distinction to be made between this and other posts that are not
> explicitly anarchist in nature, since Trotsky was a well-known advoctate
> of 'democratic centralism'.
> 
> Anyway, I've changed my hide to non-news.

Yep, non-news just as an book review of say Emma Goldman's 'My
Disillusionment in Russia' would be. And also absolutely true, Trotsky
was wedded to a particular form of hierarchical organisation.

However, this seems a good point to make sure there is clarity and
consensus in why we have guidelines we have - and how they should
develop with the site.

The hierarchy guideline really developed to prevent the newswire being
abused as the posting or promotion board of hierarchical groups. I don't
think it was ever suggested to use it to prevent people with a
hierarchical perspective from posting. Generally this is easy, and has
been discussed, because there has been consensus in the past that folks
with such a political perspective, trade unionists or even trots,
posting real grassroots action reports should be encouraged. All else
has often been hidden as non-news...

Non-news, however, has been a focus of disagreement. It is agreed that
the site isn't just for first-hand action reports, though it is what it
does best at the moment. It is not agreed where non-news starts. The
discussions around the time of the creation of the promoted newswire
hightlighted this. Should 'analysis' be hidden. Should there be space
for a 'history' topic? It would be really handy if someone had the time
to start distilling some of the positions that have been made onto the wiki.

> I think we need to work out exactly what 'corporate' means in this
> context. That could be a bit of a grey area, since it just means of a
> 'body'. Presumably we mean profit-making bodies, but then the BBC is
> officially a non profit organisation, but it relies on the government to a
> large extent.

Here I think it would be easier if we just deal with reposts from
elsewhere on the web together. I still think the proposal to create a
topic for them, using the ability to untick UK, encouraging description
and link rather than cut and paste with a pre-publish page, and working
to a full tech solution is the best idea
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-process/2006-March/0324-qc.html

ekes