[IMC-UK-Features] concerns about schnews CCA feature?

penguin penguin at riseup.net
Sat Mar 5 14:50:51 PST 2011

Hash: SHA256

I also wasn't there, but speaking to people I know that were, I would
say the article's veracity is contested - some people think it's spot
on, others think it's way off.

On this basis, I would suggest that it is questionable if it would have
met the 24h Indymedia rule - and there's no reason why it should not
have been proposed on the list first.

+1 to hiding it (at least until the feature can be debated on list)


On 05/03/11 22:37, Letyourlifesing wrote:
> I wasn't at space for change but I do know that the space for change agenda wasn't set in advance so the feature is inaccurate on at least that point. People I trust and respect who were there have said it is more generally and extensively inaccurate. I therefore think it should be hidden. 
> If it had been proposed as a feature on this list I would have pointed it out then.
> Sophia
> "Genny" <vg at genny.force9.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi
>> Yes, my recollection is that it was agreed that all SchNEWS features
>> should be proposed 24 hours in advance on the features list same as all
>> other features, unless there is some urgent reason to post sooner, but
>> a
>> message should still be sent to features to explain the reasons etc.
>> Anyone from SchNEWS able to comment?
>> cheers
>> genny
>> owen at riseup.net wrote:
>>> Hey folks,
>>> Just wanted to flag up that several commenters on this schnews
>> feature are
>>> saying it's innaccurate:
>>> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/03/475072.html
>>> I don't know whether that's true or not, but perhaps we should get
>>> feedback ASAP from people we know who were present at the 'Space for
>>> Change' gathering and find out? If it is inaccurate, then according
>> to the
>>> guidelines it shouldn't even be in the newswire, never mind the
>> centre
>>> column.
>>> The second potential issue is that it doesn't look like it was
>> proposed to
>>> the features list at all. Am I right in thinking Schnews features go
>>> through the same process as other features: 24hrs for improvements or
>>> objections? I think they should. As a one-off slip-up I don't see it
>> as a
>>> big deal, but if it's becoming a habit that's more worrying.
>>> Owen the meandering melon
>>> --
>>> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial mid-column features
>>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>> --
>> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial mid-column features
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features

- -- 

GPG key: http://tiny.cc/gpg-key
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


More information about the IMC-UK-Features mailing list