[New-imc] BLOCK: non-imc's should not sponsor new collectives(Official Response)

[Jay]

Hi everyone,

While I agree with the idea of making sure the new-imc working group list 
is populated by people who are actively interested in the work we're doing 
here (I like the idea of regular roll calls, though I hate the world 
"purge" :))), I disagree with the strict concept that only people who are 
currently active in local IMCs should be able to participate in that work.

Yes, I believe that new-imc volunteers should have active experience 
working in their local IMCs.  I can't imagine how someone would be able to 
really help a group through the new-imc process without an understanding of 
what s/he is helping them towards.  I agree that the new-imc group should 
prioritize sponsors who are currently active in local IMCs.

However, there are also some people who want to participate in the working 
group who have been involved with local IMCs in the past and have helped 
new-imcs through the process but aren't currently involved with a local 
IMC.  This may be because the person in question has moved to a new city 
and hasn't gotten involved locally yet or is working/studying/temporarily 
living in a place where there's not yet an IMC.  For a long while, before I 
moved to Philadelphia, I lived in a place where there was not, and still is 
not, a local IMC, but I still felt able to be involved in global IMC 
organizing.  So perhaps I'm a bit sensitive to this.

As for Deja specifically, he has been involved with the new-imc working 
group for a long time, has worked with his own local IMCs in Victoria and 
BC and has helped several IMCs into the network.  The situation around the 
Kamloops application was not a positive one for many reasons and there are 
obviously still bad feelings.   Also, to put it mildly, there is a 
"diversity of opinions" within the working group about some of the most 
basic things that go into a local IMC.  I don't think that kind of 
disagreement, in and of itself, is a bad thing.  Disagreements over what 
makes a local IMC viable will keep us, as a working group, on our toes.

My feeling is that if Deja is familiar with the organizers of an aspiring 
IMC in western Canada he is in a better position than any of us to help him 
through the process.  We will all be here watching the e-mails come through 
the new-imc list regarding all new IMCs, so as long as our list organizers 
maintain transparency we should be able to keep up to date with one 
another.  And, especially because we're wanting for volunteers, I think we 
should find a way to be as welcoming as possible to anyone who wants to 
participate.

  My two and a half cents,
Jay

At 2/25/2005, Deja wrote:
>clara wrote:
>
>>hi,
>>i raised my objections earlier, but since there was now reaction, I hereby
>>want to phrase this as an official block.
>>
>>
>>I hereby block Deja as a sponsor for new imcs.
>>
>Point of Protocol : Proposals are things that can be blocked. My decision 
>was to act in accordance with my duties, duties that I was asked by this 
>list to take on and have acted on for three years now. The proposal can be 
>seen here: 
>http://archives.lists.indymedia.org/new-imc/2001-November/001263.html
>My reponse to Jays request:
>http://archives.lists.indymedia.org/new-imc/2001-November/001265.html
>
>Clara is not so clearly making a proposal here. This proposal is to 'fire' 
>me as a volunteer on this list. Clara herself was not a member of her 
>local collective for a time, and used the questionable (and clearly not 
>local) bio-tech imc as her validation for being involved at the global level.
>
>>Deja from Kamloops is from a group that have decided to stop their own
>>application as an IMC a couple of months ago (even though he uses the term
>>"IMC Kamloops").
>>
>I am also a member of the Victoria and BC IMC collectives and have at 
>times also worked with the Vancouver and Alberta collectives. As I said 
>earlier, I am more than willing to 'prove' this to you by asking members 
>of those collectives to write here and verify that fact.
>Somehow this provoked accusations that I intended to 'Spam' this list and 
>that I was engaging in 'moral blackmail' and to a further proposal that 
>this list be moderated. I will respond to that proposal in a seperate email.
>
>>New-imc is a working group to help new collectives to join the Indymedia
>>network. This cannot be done by groups or individuals who have decided not
>>to be part of the Indymedia network.
>>
>>
>I have never decided to disaffilate myself from the network. If I had, I 
>would have unsubscribed from this list and imc-communication. Our 
>application has been withdrawn, not closed. Mike Rosenberg is the liason 
>and is aware of the status of the application, Clara is not in a postition 
>to comment on this.
>
>>I think everything else would be unfair to the collective that is starting.
>>
>So to clarify. It seems that Clara is proposing that people who are not 
>members of local collectives should not be allowed to sponsor IMC's.
>
>As a standing member of this list since 2001, I block this proposal.
>
>This is not an attempt to make the network work better, it is a vindictive 
>attack against an individual on this list designed to silence dissent. It 
>is clearly against the the values of this network to censor, silence or 
>attempt to marginalize dissent or make it illegal in any way. I have a 
>right to express my resistance against those who would attempt to place 
>undue restraints on the autonomous collectives in this network or thier 
>memberships. I will continue to do so.
>
>Silence is Defeat
>
>Deja
>
>_______________________________________________
>New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
>New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc