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

[Jo Makepeace]

Which wrong e-mail address contentious article are you talking about?

On 08/03/2011 20:18, protag wrote:
> Hi
>
> I don't want to stir things up, and know how hard it is for folks to
> take things back...
> But I want to support those pointing out that this article is basically flawed.
>
> "half the normal number of individuals at national gatherings"
> I'm just one more person saying this isn't true, from personal
> knowledge and basic maths.
>
> "On the first day the proposal to dissolve the shared national
> identity of Climate Camp reached an impasse"
> This seems, at best, to be false memory syndrome from the people
> providing info to Schnews. It's been comprehensively debunked by a
> number of attendees, and without it the rest of the article falls
> apart. I'd suggest treating the information source with some caution
> in future.
>
> Putting just those two falsehoods together to produce a critique of
> "blatant disregard for agreed process" in an article which obtained
> featured status on Indymedia UK in a blatant disregard of process
> would be hilarious if it wasn't so divise and upsetting. Others have
> gone through the thing in more detail. Someone else then described
> that as not picking. So I don't know what the correct number of
> defects to point out is - I'll just leave it there.
>
> Except to say, a block is not a veto, as all must surely understand.
> I suppose it was necessary to forget that in order to make the
> article hang together.
>
> I seem to recall the "wrong email address" explanation was used
> before when a contentious article bypassed the features process. More
> care required.
>
> I'm a Schnews fan, I sometimes print it out and leave it in leaflet
> racks around Leeds and Bradford.
> I've bought books and vids off the website. I guess that makes me a
> supporter, technically.
>
> I'm sorry to see this lapse.
>
> Protag
>
>
>> what are the innacuracies?
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Sophia
>> <<mailto:letyourlifesing at riseup.net>letyourlifesing at riseup.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> It's not that it highlights differences of opinions between activists,
>> it is that it is factually inaccurate. The description of the events
>> around Space for Change is misleading and often false, whatever the
>> intention of the author. I wouldn't oppose an article with a similar
>> position/tone being on the newswire, as long as it was based on fact.
>> This one however, I still think should be hidden.
>>
>>
>> <mailto:freethepeeps at riseup.net>freethepeeps at riseup.net wrote:
>>>   sophia wrote:
>>>>   I don't think it should be a newswire article either. I think it should
>>>>   be hidden on the grounds of inaccuracy.
>>>>
>>>   On the other hand, penguin wrote:
>>>
>>>   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.
>>>
>>> <http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features/2011-March/0305-t8.html>http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features/2011-March/0305-t8.html
>>>
>>>   The article is giving one side of the story (clearly there are more than
>>>   one) and I don't believe that the author set out to mislead. We have other
>>>   threads which highlight differences of opinion between activists such as:
>>>
>>>   The No Police Spies campaign
>>>
>>> <http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/02/474608.html?c=on>http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/02/474608.html?c=on
>>>
>>>   Stop Anti-Traveller Racism At Leeds Common Place
>>>
>>> <http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/02/474684.html>http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2011/02/474684.html
>>>
>>>   I do think a place should be provided for these articles.
>>>
>>>>   p.s. don't support removing mir privileges unless it transpires that it
>>>>   was deliberately posted without following due process.
>>>>
>>>   I'm against removing the log-in as well, although I do think Schnews needs
>>>   to sort out its problems with proposing to the list.
>>>
>>>   cheers
>>>
>>>   ftp
>>>
>>>
>>>   --
>>>   Indymedia United Kollektives editorial mid-column features
>>>
>>> <http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>>   >
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
>> <http://enigmail.mozdev.org>http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAk10wLUACgkQgAulSa/wRdGN6QCdHbW/UXphrze1vE8StYuZWjGD
>> DDwAnA2CYd4JVSRjAe99Hduqu8x+H4PJ
>> =bZYw
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>> --
>> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial mid-column features
>> <http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-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
> --
> Indymedia United Kollektives editorial mid-column features
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-features
>