[Imc-unity] Repost of last posting

[Jason Reep]

So what we have for #3 is:

"Indymedia respects the right of those who wish not to be identified for any
reason. 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."

Sheri and I are re-presenting the Principles (with this verison of #3) and
the Membership criteria to the general meeting this coming Tuesday.

Hey, I just looked at the list membership.  There sure are some quiet people
on this list.  Hey ya'll!! Jump back in.

love, jason


----- Original Message -----
From: lesmarquis <lesmarquis@ziplip.com>
To: Cayce Callaway <cayce9@hotmail.com>; <imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au>
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Imc-unity] Repost of last posting


> In reference to Cayce's last post
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cayce Callaway [mailto:cayce9@hotmail.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2001, 10:35 AM
> > To: imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au
> > Subject: Re: [Imc-unity] Repost of last posting
> >
> > Sorry Sean, I've been operating at near burn-out mode for the past
couple of
> > weeks.  But you're right, I think we can make this happen if we
persevere.
> >
> > That's a tricky question and I do remember us talking about it.  I'm
> > inclined to think offering that respect to some while witholding it from
> > others is too agenda laden to be a part of our basic principles.
>
> I agree
>
> I would
> > veer from that viewpoint however, when talking about police in the line
of
> > duty.  When they put themselves in the position of being public
servants,
> > and despite their most common behavior that is what they're supposed to
be,
> > in my book, they give up their right to privacy.
>
> I agree
>
>
> >
> > 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..."
>
>
> this is fine, but the rest of the statement goes into video/photos of
people in the IMC space, do we want to keep it that way or try to make it
more broad-spectrum; personally I say we leave it to the IMC space. Anything
else gets too complicated and too censorial. It can be a general
"understanding" amongst IMC's that we do not publish material incriminating
toward individuals, but as a written Principal of Unity...I don't think so.
>
>
>
> So, I'm saying what Cayce put up is looking pretty good unless any one
else may have a problem.
>
> Cheers, Sean
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> imc-unity mailing list
> imc-unity@lists.cat.org.au
> http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/imc-unity
>