[Imc-unity] 1st complete proposal?

[lesmarquis]

Cayce,
The reason I included "reprisals" et al, was because in the discussion our group had in San Fran it was voiced that that is the ideology behind the policy, people were looking for a wording which would preclude it from meaning people other than activists, people were concerned that someone could take it to mean Klansmen and nazi-types, but I guess if they considered themselves "activists" what would that mean to the statement, and what does it mean to the statement if we leave out that bit and just go with your suggestion? (I think it would boil down to the same issue actually). 
So really the question is how do we word this to show our intent (it it is our intent) to shield/protect cetrtain people/groups while not giving the same umbrella to others?

does this all make sens and what are thoughts from everyone?

Cheers, Sean

Actually I just had another thought on the last one (#3).  What if instead 
of listing the reasons and therefore limiting them, we say "All IMC's 
respect the right of those who, for any reason, wish not to be 
identified..."

cc

----Original Message Follows----
From: "Jason Reep" <jasonr@speakeasy.org>
To: <imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au>
Subject: Re: [Imc-unity] 1st complete proposal?
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:00:28 -0700

waggle.

now we're moving!

what's up next?

-jason

----- Original Message -----
From: lesmarquis <lesmarquis@ziplip.com>
To: <imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 12:51 PM
Subject: [Imc-unity] 1st complete proposal?


 > Ok,
 > So putting it all together we get something like:
 >
 >
 > "Indymedia respects the right of those who wish not to be identified for
fear of reprisal. retribution, or persecution from authorities. With this in
mind, all IMC's respect the right of activists who choose not to be
photographed
 > or filmed, and will encourage all contributing reporters to do the same.
It
 > is required that anyone who wishes to record,
 > film or photograph inside a physical IMC space announce their intention 
in
 > advance to all present and respect the decision of any person(s) who
choose
 > not to be included."
 >
 >
 > How do we feel about that?
 >
 > Cheers, Sean
 >
 > _______________________________________________
 > imc-unity mailing list
 > imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au
 > http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imc-unity
 >

_______________________________________________
imc-unity mailing list
imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au
http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imc-unity


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

_______________________________________________
imc-unity mailing list
imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au
http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imc-unity

<p></BLOCKQUOTE>