[Imc-uk-network] Decision making [was: New Crabgrass UK Network]
maqui at syndicate.org.uk
Wed Aug 5 07:49:32 PDT 2009
My very quick five pence worth. I think mish is spot on in the mail
below, so it is, to my view, gdm when he says: "part of the adventure
and fun about being involved in this network is that peoplekeep on going
off and doing amazing and great things: they have a spark of creativity.
of course, not all of them work out, but as long as they're good, we
should at least give them an opportunity...."
I also think jim dog has clearly explained his reasons for creating that
uk network page in crabgrass, and i personally don't see anything
'sinister' in there, nor any attempt to overstep the process. It is
created, it may work and be useful or it may not. If it does great, if
not, well there's nothing wrong in keep trying new stuff is it?
Imho the imc-uk network is in serious need of going back to the past
culture of co-operation and trust
.. something mickfuzz already pointed out in a mail to these lists
recently. otherwise what is the point?
>> Also, can you clarify what attributes this has which excludes it
>> from the normal/usual process of consensus decision making? Surely
>> if someone's actions could affect other people they are worth at
>> least discussing beforehand?
> I think there are important points here. In indymedia, and other
> non-heirarchical groups I have worked in, there is always a balance
> between consensus and autonomy. I don't think any group can work when
> every little tiny decision requires consensus before any action happens.
> Also, there is the difference between "asking permission" before doing
> something and "asking forgiveness" afterwards. You ask permission when
> the thing you are doing is big and controversial. When you expect your
> act to be fine with everyone then you go ahead and do it when you have
> the idea, the time and the energy, and once it's done, you tell
> everyone. If you've misjudged it, people can object or ask for
> clarification (as in this case) and you have a discussion and learn a
> little better what is acceptable in this bunch of people.
> In this case I would say it was a reasonable decision to say "crabgrass
> has this thing where multiple groups can belong to a network, why don't
> I create a crabgrass network to cover indymedia UK, scotland, bristol
> ..." It's not a big thing, it doesn't replace anything else, it is
> another space indymedia activists in the various collectives in the UK
> can use to work. Personally I would like to thank Jim for taking some
> initiative and getting on with it.
> I am slightly worried that trust has broken down in indy UK to the
> extent that a small thing like this produces such suspicious responses.
> Is anyone working on a network meeting? That seems like the best way to
> build trust to me ...
> Imc-uk-network mailing list
> Imc-uk-network at lists.indymedia.org
> Also other list of similar interest Indymedia United Kollektives process:
More information about the Imc-uk-network