[Resolve] Introduction and Complaint against untouchable tech
stacy at cat.org.au
Sat Feb 25 19:42:50 PST 2006
I agree with you that there is an inherent hierarchy within imc... the
techs will always have the power to manipulate the software used to run
imc services... that is what they are there for.
It is possible that some of the techs could be corrupted by this power.
However your complaint lacks a critical factor for us to determine if this
is the case here or not. Without a valid reason for you to be in irc, it
is impossible to tell whether or not your banning was justified or not.
You could help us to keep the reigns in our techs by providing us with the
reason you wish to participate in indymedia irc. Unfortunately, without
this critical information, your complaint only reinforces their authority
by making it seem as though your banning was justified.
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Galen Thurber wrote:
> ben wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> reading through the issues, being active in no IRC at all, my
>> impression is the following:
>> Galen sent his first mail to this list, mainly criticizing being banned
>> from irc.
> Ben you forgot to mention the complaint against Jeff Moe [aka Jebba] who
> is untouchable, hence no complaint can be made against him despite his
> abuse because he 'donated' computer services. That is a serious issue
> that is completely being ignored here, there is / was no collective
> decision or input on how he operates IMC IRC [a service he donated].
> Every complaint against him in the end is completely useless since he
> can not be help accountable. He can ban, he can censor etc.. and there
> is nothing any collective can do. We are subject to him. How ironic for
> an organization that claims to be free can have complete censorship from
> one person and his clique.
>> When he was asked for reasons several times, there came no response or
>> examlpary logs from IRC discussions, which would paint a picture of how
>> he was mistreated.
> You claim there has been no response. Yet I am suppose to obtain chat
> logs from another persons's computer [in this case Jeff Moe]
> to show that he indeed abuse his situation and collaborate with other
> IRCops and the IMC web admin to have me banned. Get real.
> Lets go to square one shall we.
> I have logs of what I was participating in on the IMC IRC, I have shown
> them to an IRCop named Libby [micah forgot to mention that], Libby
> agreed that I had not done anyone that warranted a ban. I had said hello
> to a member [Mr_Smiley, who is dumbfounded why I was banned] that joined
> the chat room. That got me booted, when I returned I joked I was booted
> and then I was banned. That doesn't make any sense and it smacks of
> discrimination. As if all of a sudden Jeff Moe judged I was the enemy
> despite my support for his project, as they say "something really
> stinks" there. By when I asked 'why did you ban me?' I a get a response
> 'fuck off asshole' something vile is going on in the background. It
> stinks. And when out of the blue ops come and start interrogating me
> about who I know, one gets the strong impression that you are being
> hunted. I got that impression. Micah gave that impression, he did NOT
> identify who he was and who asked him to hunt me down, but I have a good
> idea who did. Jeff.
> Now if Micah has the balls to come clean he'll post the messages between
> him and Jeff [jebba] and Steve [stevo32],but he wont because that will
> show he was a participant in abuse and a witch hunt.
>> The only IRC-logs came from Micah, which gave me the impression, that
>> the ops decided quite reasonable.
> Your impression was based not on context and on incomplete logs and
> misleading statements from Micah.
>> Through these logs and through the
>> words that have been used in the current debate (ashole, etc.)
> Funny it is allowed to call me, a good man, a troll without any
> recourse. Back in the dark ages they called people they wished to
> outcast "witches". Get my point.
>> I see it as the best way forward, if Galen would take a step back and
>> reflects with some friends or professionals how it comes that so many
>> people get the impression that his behaviour is that of a "troll".
> I tell it like it is and that bothers liars, I expose. Life is not a
> popularity contest.
>> reflection might bring big benefit to the issue of about how debates
>> should be run fair and constructively.
>> I didn't have the impression, that discussing this issue here on this
>> list will be of much help for anybody involved.
> That's because the main issue is being ignored. Accountability of Jeff Moe.
>> @Galen: If you have a different opinion, please don't continuing arguing
>> without quotes and please don't insult any other persons. This only
>> strengthens my (and I assume other's as well) impression that your
>> behaviour is that of a troll. Not saying that you are one, but you
>> behave like one, in the current debate...and from that I can imagine how
>> it was in the past in IRC-channels. I would love to be wrong, but
>> therefore I'd need proofs(through your future behaviour or
>> In the moment I don't see a chance for "Mediation" (all parties comming
>> to a mutual based decision).
>> Due to the level of escalation, "Arbitration" seems to be more
>> appropriate, which means a "third party" makes the decision.
>> In this case, this "third party" would the "IMC-Resolve-List", which was
>> originally adressed by Galen in his first mail and can be seen as the
>> "third party" between IRCops and Galen.
>> Therefore I would love to read comments from other people subscribed...
>> Sorry, for perhaps some strange english, but I it's not my mothertongue
>> and I am short in time these days, but wanted to post my opinion on that
>> With more time, I'd love tpo comment on the Darwin-Debate, but that may
>> take some time...
>> Love & solidarity,
> Resolve mailing list
> Resolve at lists.indymedia.org
More information about the Resolve