mrdemeanour at jackpot.uk.net
Wed Jun 1 12:24:16 PDT 2011
Is it the intention of the Indykop Krew that I should be banned from
participating in IMC Oxford collaborative documents on the docs server?
Because that is the consequence of revoking my docs login. This means,
for example, that I can't contribute to draft agendas, or post any
minutes that I might take. Obviously Oxford uses the docs server for
many other things as well.
I'm not going to try to circumvent the ban by registering with a new
name. Someone in the docs team implied that would be petty and
tiny-minded, and I agree.
Is it the Krew's intention to somehow encourage Oxford to expel me? They
haven't been asked to expel me. Why were Oxford not consulted about
this? It obviously affects them. Does the Krew not recognise Oxford's
autonomy? Shouldn't a consensus decision be one that commands the
consent of all those affected? Why should Oxford be exempt?
This is the second time the Krew have ridden roughshod over the
interests of the Oxford collective. The first time was on May 1, when
Oxford IMC was given a week to find a new host and set up a CMS on it.
It's clear that the Krew wants to make listwork ban me from moderating
Oxford's lists - a job I've been doing for about 8 years. Listwork, to
their credit, seem to be reluctant. But if the Krew manages to get my
list subscriptions to Oxford lists revoked, how do you think that will
sit with the Principles of Unity? Since when could one group tell
another group who they might permit to participate?
The Krew's agenda is being pressed without due regard to the concerns of
a collective that isn't involved in this dispute. I think you need to
consult Oxford before carrying out any more of these reckless and
[I've written this on my own behalf, and I haven't discussed these
remarks with Oxford colleagues - or any colleagues, for that matter]
More information about the Imc-uk-process