[New-imc] I feel Petros has violated the trust of this group

[John Milton]

Some thoughts about "taking of group voice without mandate":

The first link you provide:

http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-communication/2006-August/0901-a9.html

takes us to a place where Petros identifies himself as a member of "New 
IMC" but I see nothing there which I can read as a claim to be speaking 
on behalf of "New IMC".

For clarity:

I may choose to say:

"I'm a member of the Republican Party. I think Garry Glitter was the 
best musician ever".

or I might even say

"Speaking as a member of the Republican Party let me say I think Garry 
Glitter was the best musician ever".

and not worry, but if I were to say

"The Republican Party feels that Garry Glitter was the best musician ever".

Then I'd be looking over my shoulder the next time I visited the U.S.

(Come to think of it I am already looking over my shoulder WHENEVER I 
visit the U.S., so maybe thats not the best example, but anyway...)

The rest of what you attribute to Petros, Vis.:

 > The Proposal is an interference and a violation of the currently
 >
 > active procedure of the new-imc work group: new-imc is already
 > processing the case of imc-darwin.
 > http://english-cyprus.indymedia.org/newswire/display/239/index.php
 >
 > He called a procedure "ours" when it was not, he claimed we have
 > "jurisdiction" where we do not, he called "our" procedures "formal"
 > when they were not, and he describes the threat to his procedures as a
 > "torpedo," a "violation" and an "interference," without any consent,
 > authorization or even a discussion about doing so with the group.

seems to all come from the document found here (your hyperlink):
http://english-cyprus.indymedia.org/newswire/display/239/index.php
which is not the voice of Petros speaking but rather is "signed"

"Cyprus IndyMedia Collective"

So I don't see the relevance of it. But as with all I write, thats just 
me, unless I claim otherwise explicitly.


nick wrote:
> Ok, good point John, I will try to provide the history of what
> happened here and explain why it was problematic for me.
> 
> First Petros said this:
> 
>>There is already a formal procedure going on with the new-imc group
> 
> working to resolve the problems. Any decision of this kind will torpedo
> the possibility of new-imc ever having any credibility to determine
> situations within its jurisdiction.
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-communication/2006-August/0901-a9.html
> 
> I responded:
> 
>>I think Petros has appeared to speak on behalf of the new-imc group and that
> 
> this is inappropriate as we have had NO discussion about this latest
> proposal at all.
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-communication/2006-August/0901-8i.html
> 
> But then he ignored my concern, didn't retract anything or apologize,
> and did it again and with even more vehement language:
> 
>>The Proposal is an interference and a violation of the currently
> 
> active procedure of the new-imc work group: new-imc is already
> processing the case of imc-darwin.
> http://english-cyprus.indymedia.org/newswire/display/239/index.php
> 
> He called a procedure "ours" when it was not, he claimed we have
> "jurisdiction" where we do not, he called "our" procedures "formal"
> when they were not, and he describes the threat to his procedures as a
> "torpedo," a "violation" and an "interference," without any consent,
> authorization or even a discussion about doing so with the group.
> 

---
Peace: John Milton

email: john at johnmilton.ca
mobile (Canada): 905-537-8472
web: johnmilton.ca

Encrypted email welcome. PGP key on my website
Fingerprint: 40D8 5835 7230 8EE1 E968  1E7A 5CF1 68A6 C0E2 F9DC

Koan for our times: "Are we smarter than yeast?"