[Payment-discuss] consulta questions - more edits

[Libertinus]

I think is good that all collectives respond it and the sub collectives too.

I don't know if only Argentina and Brazil are a subnetwork.

about your new propostal Toya...

I not block it, but the payment Consulta is too big now.

I don't have problem in transform this in the "Indymedia Network  
Consulta" a real census. But this will need more work, people and time.

The first idea was just a watch about the situation about money in  
local collectives. I think is not good transform this in a big census.

Payment discuss list just need a simple view of the network for  
continues discussing.



Libertinus ______________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/libertinus/
http://www.fotolog.net/libertino


Quoting toya <toya at riseup.net>:

> oi,
> yah i will do it to pt for sure...can i will check what the brasil
> network prefers if they want to answer it everyone together or each
> collective answer by itself the consulta...
> cuz i am not sure what to do in this case...
> ciao
> toya
>
> Em Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 06:36:33PM -0200, Libertinus escreveu:
>> > "13) Does your IMC have a policy against paying people?"
>>
>> We can change the question to:
>>
>> 13) Does your IMC have any policy about money issues, like payment or
>> fund request?
>>
>>
>> when we finish I will translate to Spanish and sure Toya to PT.
>>
>> And I can be who send the Consulta to Spanish nodes.
>>
>>
>> Libertinus ______________________
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/libertinus/
>> http://www.fotolog.net/libertino
>>
>>
>> Quoting "Mr. Demeanour" <mrdemeanour at jackpot.uk.net>:
>>
>> > Amy L. Dalton wrote:
>> >> Hi all, I think we're almost there, right? Someone suggested tomorrow
>> >> as a deadline - is that still what we're aiming for?
>> >
>> > I suggested it (and it's today now); a few others - perhaps three - have
>> > said that a deadline was a good idea, but I don't consider it to   
>> be agreed.
>> >
>> > If we still want to go with today, then I think we should delegate
>> > someone/people to make finishing adjustments, and then to distribute it
>> > when they are ready. To whom should it be sent, and in what form?
>> >>
>> >> If an imcs pays people, it does not mean that have "a policy in
>> >> support of paying people." They might, and they might not. For
>> >> example, when philly imc paid a consultant, we did not have a policy
>> >> for or against paying people.
>> >
>> > Similarly, if an IMC does *not* have a policy on something, that doesn't
>> > mean they aren't against it; it just means that it hasn't come up as an
>> > issued that had to be decided. So having a policy on something can be
>> > seen as a sign that opinion is (or has been) to some extent divided.
>> > There's no policy here against the occupation of Iraq, for example.
>> >
>> > If we are going to ask questions about policy, we need to bear that in
>> > mind when evaluating the answers. That's what I meant when I said that
>> > answers to questions about policy need to be considered in some kind of
>> > context.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jack.
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Payment-discuss mailing list
>> > Payment-discuss at lists.indymedia.org
>> > http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/payment-discuss
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Payment-discuss mailing list
>> Payment-discuss at lists.indymedia.org
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/payment-discuss
>
> --
> .....
>