[New-imc] tamba bay indymedia

[Jay]

Hi bht and everyone,

I'm still a supporter of the new-imc process (for reasons I'll send in a 
response to the discussion on imc-communication), and I'll be happy to work 
the the Tampa Bay IMC from this point on.  You're right, they sound like 
they're in really good shape.  Now it seems all they have to do is gather 
their information together in some way to present to the rest of the 
network.  Should be easy to do if they're already functioning.

Is that okay?  Bht, do you think I should contact Charles myself or, since 
you've been in touch with him, do you think it'd be better for you to 
connect us?

Jay

At 3/27/2005, bht wrote:
>hey folks, here is tampa bay imc.  tampaindymedia.org
>
>tampa is a functioning imc and they have been doing good work for quite 
>awhile.  i made contact with them over a year ago and they have existed on 
>the portland imc cities list for six months or so.  below are the last two 
>communication from me and the charles, one of the people i have been 
>working with in tampa.
>
>for those that are unaware.  there has been a lengthy discussion on 
>imc-communication about new-imc and its relationship to the network.  it 
>has been said that the very idea of a new-imc process is in direct 
>contradiction to the first principle of unity that all imc's are supposed 
>to agree to.  and which tampa imc has agreed to in spirit.
>
>being on the questioning side of new-imc for quite awhile, i dont know if 
>i can justifiably be their 'new-imc sponsor'.  however, as i have stated 
>in my email to charles below, i will stand up for tampa imc and do what it 
>takes to ge tthem recognized ont he cities list.  however, i will not 
>agree to take them through this process, the process that has been under fire.
>
>i am sending this to new-imc because i was sent a personal message and it 
>would be a disservice to tampa to just disregard.  and i wouldnt feel 
>compfortable not stating my reasons for not wanting to take them through 
>this process.  so, here they are.  in this email they have agreed to the 
>POU and MC.  THey have a website that functions and a collective that does 
>good work.  I think this is quite enough to accept them into this loose 
>network of netowrks dedicated to the dissemination if independant media!
>
>bht
>portland imc volunteer
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject:        Re: new-imc application
>Date:   Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:32:06 -0500
>From:   Charles <charles at tampaindymedia.org>
>To:     bht at indymedia.org
>References:     <1351.bht.1102710278.squirrel at 24.22.15.180>
>
>
>
>bht,
>Charles here from the Tampa Bay IMC.  I know we kinda dropped the ball
>on our global application.  We all burned out after the election as we
>were doing so much leading up to that point.  I, personally, spend 14
>hours on election day at our community radio station (along with other
>TBIMC volunteers who came and went throughout the day) taking calls from
>people having trouble voting and triage-ing reporter/camera response if
>necessary.
>
>Anyway, we've had time to recover from that and more, and are
>resubmitting things.  At our meeting earlier this week we went down the
>Membership Criteria and Global Principles of Unity, agreeing to
>everything.  Our most recent application still stands as is.  I was
>unsure what diversity questions you were referring us to and was unsure
>where exactly to send all this.  I just re-signed up for the new-imc
>list and assume that would be a good place.
>
>Regarding the website, we are still running partially proprietary
>software.  Its architect, one of our tech people, is working to add
>better but necessary functionality until we make the switch.  We're in
>the process of looking for affordable server space and are waiting for
>the new version of sf-active to be released (if it hasn't been already).
>We've been told that Pittsburgh may have some server space we could use,
>but we'd rather decentralize the server network so that as few IMCs as
>possible are hosted on the same server.  We're also not set on sf-active
>as a CMS, but it looks fairly decent.  We do know we do NOT want to use
>Dada.
>
>Anyway, let me know I need to do something different than what I've
>assumed.
>
>Charles
>
>On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 12:24 -0800, bht wrote:
>>hi there.
>>I wonder where you all have come with the information that was provided?
>>I have been thinking about it and now I think it would be good for you all
>>to complete the process now.  Many new-imcs are passed through without
>>even having a website, so tampas intent to have an open source software
>>website should be quite enought o be welcomed into the network.
>>I will duly stand up to any questions, concerns about this on the new-imc
>>list.  My thought process had been about bringing in complete imc's, but I
>>am slowly realizing that imc's become whole once they have the affirmation
>>of being part of the network.
>>So, I would like to invite you to send along the required information:
>>Mission statement, Editorial guidelines, Agreement to IMC Principles of
>>Unity, and Tampa Bay specific principles of unity, should they exist. 
>>Also, the answers to the questions of diversity and such.  If you need
>>links to where the questions are, I can send them again.  Or, you can send
>>me what you feel is ready and we can work on it from there.
>>Does this sound good?
>>bht
>>portland
>--
>"It's not enough to slow the rate of destruction. We have to increase
>the rate of creation." -Sheri Herndon
>www.tampaindymedia.org
>www.indymedia.org
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
>New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc