[Imc-uk-useability] imc participation in 2nd knowledgelab lancaster

[ionnek]

hi,
i just wrote a mail to the knowledgelab people about possible indymedia 
participation.
http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/knowledgelab
thought i'd copy it here since this is where we are talking both tech 
and user stuff.
best
ionnek

---- copied mail start ----

Hi,
some indymedia people, mainly from the UK but also a few others, are 
interested in participating in the 2nd knowledgelab. I'll give you my 
version of how I perceive this discussion.
We'll come up with a proposal at some point. I guess it will involve 
both, a long session, maybe split into smaller groups and experimental 
formats, and practical work. And we are interested in planning the 
session together with other participants beforehand. I hope I can show 
with the following thoughts what i mean with "technology is  a social 
practice".

Indymedia UK is at the moment working on several changes to the website, 
see here:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-uk-useability

We have a feeling that the knowledgelab might be a good place to discuss 
the functionality and the role of indymedia. Indymedia is a very good 
example for the convergence of technical, social and political issues, 
so we think that such a debate would not only be beneficial to 
indymedia, but also to social movements more generally, from a practical 
point of view as well as from a "movement-research" point of view.

Especially noels points about "a model for mom" would be interesting. 
Indymedia is a very weird network-slimeball-colony of fungy. Partly it 
is made of traditional activist meetings. Partly of online-bonding. 
Partly of buerocracy. partly a global network with hubs and all that.  
partly a fluid, ever changing thing, but with a number of longstanding 
people and even kind of "institutions".

The issues we are dealing with in imc uk at the moment are the comments 
under our articles, and linking the calendar of the website with the 
reports. Expressed more broadly, these issues are about better 
connecting indymedia with other online resources and the people who use 
them.

Being, amongst other things, an internet resource, indymedia constantly 
produces technological innovation. I think the success of the project 
has its roots in very close communication between tech savvy people and 
those who actually use the technology, without wanting to delve into 
some linux kernel. We are constantly developing language to communicate 
needs and technical potentials, and structures to implement innovations 
in a non-hierarchical, non-centric, non-technocratic way. Everybody who 
has been involved in implementing or using new software (at work, for 
expl.) knows the problems of this process.
Because we are all to a certain extend immersed in the project, we have 
the motivation to put our creativity into communication. What happens 
depends on who is involved. The fact that it took ages for indymedia to 
properly connect with video facilities is a good example.

The knowledgelab might be a good setting for mutual inspiration. 
Indymedia came up at the last one as well - people talked about the G8 
reporting, and what it means doing an action first and then having to 
write a report as well. Division of labour? Can it be overcome? There 
are technical solutions: During the G8, it was possible to upload stuff 
to the newswire via mobile phone. There are social obstacles: Not many 
people knew about this. There is the fast activist dynamic: The facility 
was introduced only a few days before the main action day. So - talking 
indymedia is not just talking "java or ruby", it also means talking "how 
do we use this resource" and "what does it need to do" and "...but i 
prefer to write in my own blog / magazine". It means taking web-content 
out into real space: screenings, workshops, print publications. It means 
intervening in both virtual and physical space.

so that's my take - others will disagree ;-)

best
ionnek