[Payment-discuss] "Best Practices" (was Re: Introduction (en y es versions))

[Guy Berliner]

Deva:
I think that, rather than try to propose something as a Principle of 
Unity, sometimes it's better to propose something as a "best practice." 
The idea has been around for awhile of coming up with lists of "best 
practices," which aren't absolute in the same fashion as Principles of 
Unity, but which are given enough authority by way of being so listed 
that one should really have a good reason for doing things differently.

To me, the strongest argument for making "all-volunteer work" into a 
Best Practice is precisely that a "Principle" is something that has a 
kind of universality to it: it's a moral commitment that would be 
advisable to follow under pretty much any circumstances. I don't think, 
in the world we live in right now, given the fact that there are 
numerous organizations that do very admirable and valuable work, but 
have some reliance on paying people for some parts of that work, that we 
can usefully elevate "all-volunteer work" to the status of a generalized 
moral or ethical Principle.

Deva,
Creo que, de vez en cuando, es preferible designar una propuesta como 
una "Mejor Práctica," siquiera incluyendola en una lista quasi-oficial 
de "Mejores Prácticas" (una designación que quiere decir una práctica 
ideal o preferible pero no obligatoria). Muchas veces esta idea ha sido 
mencionada, de crear tal lista de Mejores Practicas que de esa manera 
adquieren una autoridad bastante para imponerse a cualquier que no 
quieren seguirlas la obligación de justificar la necesidad de una excepción

Opino que el argumento mas fuerte para designar el principio de "no 
pagar para el trabajo de Indymedia" como "Mejor Práctica" en vez de 
"Principio de Unidad" es el hecho de que un "Principio de Unidad" debe 
tener el carácter de principio de ética universal, y que en nuestro 
mundo actual, donde hay muchas organizaciones que todavía hacen mucho 
trabajo importante y admirable y tienen que pagar para algunas fases de 
este trabajo, no creo que es útil (o posible) elevar este principio al 
nivel de un principio de ética or moralidad universal.

deva wrote:
> Such an idea has been around a long time, and did not originate with 
> indymedia.
>
> I believe it is primarily in the U.S. though, where people are getting 
> paid for indymedia work. It is also in the U.S. where people are 
> perhaps most attached to an indulgent lifestyle.
>
> This sort of argument always perplexes me. If the place is so poor 
> that people have no time to volunteer, then where do they get the 
> money to pay themselves? It is also confusing when this argument is 
> put forward when it is in a relatively well off college town in the 
> U.S. where multiple people are getting paid for indymedia work. 
> Personally I think it is questionable to use the name of the poor 
> elsewhere, to justify behavior here. If some indymedia people from a 
> truly poor nation would like to explain how they are going about it, 
> why they choose to pay people and so on, I honestly would like to hear 
> this. My mind is open.
>
>
> So there are so far on this list.
>
> From the U.S. -
>
> Nick (Houston)
> Sascha (UC)
> Aaron (Philly)
> Eric (Big Muddy)
> Michelle (UC)
> Guy (Portland)
> Daniel (UC)
> Kim (Portland)
> Sheri (Floating)
> Deva (Portland)
> Jay (Philadelphia)
>
> 11 people
> 8 for payment
> 2 against
> 1 unstated
>
> The rest of the Network -
>
> Jack (UK)
> Libertinus (Uruguay)
> Toya (Brasil)
> Cameron (Sydney)
>
> 4 people
> 3 against payment
> 1 unstated
>
>
> I would say the first priority would be to not have 75% of people on 
> the list from the U.S.
>
> Second, while there is not enough people to be sure of the pattern, 
> the current breakdown is already noteworthy. Most people in the U.S. 
> wanting payment, most outside the opposite.
>
> Perhaps we can propose nobody gets paid in the U.S., but it is okay 
> elsewhere. I simply do not believe it is necessary in this country. 
> There are people here in portland who have children, full time jobs 
> (not high paying) and who find time to do brilliant media/organizing 
> work and who are important and strong voices.
>
> Maybe everyone from the U.S., myself included, should step aside, get 
> more people involved from around the network and let everyone else 
> decide whether people should be paid in indymedia and if so, under 
> what circumstances. Everyone from the U.S. can agree to abide by 
> whatever decisions the rest of the network collectively decided. Might 
> be a good exercise for all of us to not be at the center of things.
>
> regards,
> deva
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 30, 2007, at 2:42 PM, sheri at speakeasy.org 
> <mailto:sheri at speakeasy.org> wrote:
>
>> This has also been raised as an issue about diversity and 
>> inclusivity.  Those who cannot afford to participate in indymedia 
>> because they have families, work full time or have other 
>> responsibilities that keep them from being able to give their time 
>> and energy to Indymedia, might be able to participate if they were 
>> paid.  It's an interesting argument and I heard it through multiple 
>> people in multiple countries.  It actually did not originate in the 
>> U.S. but in South Africa.  How do you expect people from the poorer 
>> parts to get involved when they must work?
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Payment-discuss mailing list
> Payment-discuss at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/payment-discuss
>