[Imc-uk-process] re-stating position of mayday collective and proposed way forward

Mr. Demeanour mrdemeanour at jackpot.uk.net
Fri Apr 29 13:03:29 PDT 2011


On 29/04/2011 20:38, cactus at aktivix.org wrote:
> Hello Genny
>
> Lets be a bit more honest.

That would make a change.

> Some in 'A' Group (mayday) have been *some* of the people maintaining
> the UK site, along with many other people.

Actually for the last nine months it's been just us, with the local
collectives that use Mir. Despite all the lurkers from London. And we've
been managing fine.

> That is why we are at this point, the UK site is not yours for the
> taking or continuing with as it is. Your techs do need to hand over
> the UK url to someone trusted, if this is not pointing at the
> archived site on 1st May we have to presume you are hijacking the UK
> site, something the global IMC community will not take lightly, so
> please once again, pause before you do this.

Errrm. We're committed to running this site, on the URL it's been
running on for a decade. You want us to move to some other URL, right? I
think that's something the global IMC community will not take lightly,
unless it's done with our *full* agreement.

> Your lack of success at the new-imc process is your own
> responsibility, you had 5 months to try, you made a mess of it to
> date.

Actually we didn't make a mess of it; we've made two perfectly
reasonable applications, the first of which was withdrawn at your
demand. It's new-imc that has made a mess of it. An individual with an
axe to grind has decided to be a prick. That's not our fault at all.

> If and when you go through New-imc you can become an indymedia.
> Before that time you do not get to just continue by default on the
> back of others hard work.

Actually our hard work. We're all old-time IndyUK hands. And the rest of
you have chosen to abandon IMC UK, and start attacking us. Your claim to
be responsible for IMC UK is very weak.

> So you have to move to your Maydaymedia URL.

Why? Because that's what you're telling us? Perhaps you've mistaken us
for a collective that isn't autonomous.

>
> I notice one of the URL's bought<http://www.maydaymedia.org.uk/en/>,
> is an exact copy, which i presume will be drastically changed when
> you go live so there is no visual resemblance to the UK site.

Presume away.

> These are all things that mark out your collectives ability to be
> trusted, with out them i can see no need to continue the
> discussions.

Well I guess we'll count you out then.
>
> From your mails resently, there is no real desire to fork by your
> collective,

First sentence of the statement you quoted:

"The mayday collective wishes the Bradford agreement to go ahead, but
reiterates that this agreement was made on the basis of a.indymedia.org
and b.indymedia.org."

It's obvious that we can't work with you. Why would we not want to split?

You apparently don't care to apply through new-imc. Aggromedia isn't an
indymedia collective. That's fine - it's a new site. Indy UK is a
ten-year-old site, and it's part of Indymedia. We agreed to change our
URL *within* Indymedia. That isn't going to be possible on May 1. As
your own allies and friends have pointed out, that was not anticipated
by any of us.

But we're not going to give up on a national open-posting newswire for
the UK. We have a responsibility. All this arrogant bluster won't change
that.

-- 
MrD (in a personal capacity)


More information about the Imc-uk-process mailing list