[www-editoriales] Re: [www-features] Re: feature proposal : Chavez Venezuela

César Gerena gerenapr at riseup.net
Tue Sep 7 12:48:28 PDT 2004


Hay tres videos de las asambleas populares en este enlace que deben subir
junto al destaque de las asambleas si se llega a consenso sobre eso.

Sabemos del error del compa guido al subir un destaque mientras se
discutia aun, por eso mismo hacemos incapié en lo centralizado del proceso
en unos cuantos, eso es lo que debemos cambiar ya para poder continuar
trabajando todos en este proceso participativo.

Bueno, lo importante que suba por favor.



We have 3 videos from the popular assemblies in venezuela that should go
up with the proposed feature if consensus and justice is reached.

We already know about comrade guido's erros of posting a feature that was
still being discussed, that's why we are asking for a more open process
and decentralized so we can keep working together for this participatory

Well, the important info should go up please.
> hi,
> "We have to clear this process and give equal access to members of
>> different IMC, this is too centralized and that is inacceptable. The
>> texaco editorial went up without consensus and lies."
> I send this:
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/www-features/2004-September/0906-z7.html
> You're writing about video.
> Wcich video do you talk about, did not see any video mentioned in a
> proposal.
> greetings, guioke
> PS: the feature is posted because of me making a fault in time, as nothing
> to do with being centralized.
>> Solidaridad.
>> [en]
>> We have to clear this process and give equal access to members of
>> different IMC, this is too centralized and that is inacceptable. The
>> texaco editorial went up without consensus and lies. We are waiting now
>> to
>> clear the feature with video of what the social movements are asking of
>> the process , still waiting.
>> http://pr.indymedia.org/features/venezuela/
>> Solidaridad.
>> Gerenapr
>>> hi bb,
>>> hold on a sec...first of all, my complain in here is how the process we
>>> are having in this list is mess up.... i know you worked on the
>>> referendum
>>> features modifying it to try to reach a consensus..it is an apreciated
>>> act
>>> of yours but even so that wanst a consensus on it...sorry bout that but
>>> i
>>> cant really tell you that after it was mofidying everyone said ok is
>>> good
>>> to go  now ..cuz some ppl were still having issues about that...
>>> also, i am not intresting in asking ppl to leave cuz they put up a
>>> features without consensus..or anything like that... i am intresting in
>>> build here a good process for us to decided on our features so this
>>> kind
>>> of thing doesnt happen again... i believe everyone who is in here has
>>> the
>>> same intention, so why not try to create a good way to work together???
>>> what i am critizing in here is that for one situation we had one way of
>>> dealing with it and for other we have a diferent way....
>>> and we are talking here about two really simulars situations...
>>> anda gain, i would like to know how is the texaco features ofending the
>>> social moviments in venezuela??
>>> ciao
>>> toya
>>>>> And yes, I see here a contradiction process ... we just had the same
>>>>> situation..a debate about a features with strong positions..and for
>>>>> that
>>>>> situation the features went up without consensus ..... but now, when
>>>>> we
>>>>> are facing a simular one the solution is to not put it up cuz we dont
>>>>> have
>>>>> a consensus...
>>>> Toya, I have a really hard time engaging with you on this, because you
>>>> (and pretty much everyone else on this list) have refused to engage
>>>> me.
>>>> i
>>>> spent hours going through the archives and compiling a summary of the
>>>> entire sequence of events that led to the posting of the first
>>>> feature,
>>>> and only one person in the collective gave any response.  and now you
>>>> bring this up again as though i had never written anything!
>>>> And what do you mean?  the second feature did go up!  the one
>>>> venezuelan
>>>> on the list WANTED the information about Microsoft/Chevron to go up,
>>>> he
>>>> just wanted it to be done in a way that at the same time did not
>>>> attack
>>>> social movements, which is what the first proposal basically did.  In
>>>> my
>>>> opinion this conflict was resolved beautifully well, though it was
>>>> very
>>>> difficult.
>>>> In the last week or so I have really wanted to quit this collective,
>>>> because this notion that I violated consensus on the first proposal
>>>> continues to be mentioned, but not really discussed.  Any time I have
>>>> tried to open a discussion about it I have been totally ignored, in
>>>> both
>>>> private and public emails.  To me the accusation is VERY serious.  If
>>>> it
>>>> is true I should be held accountable in some way, even asked to leave.
>>>> If
>>>> it is not true, then it is very serious that people are making a false
>>>> accusation.  So which is it?  I personally am extremely upset that so
>>>> many
>>>> people on this list continue ahead pretending there is no problem, and
>>>> so
>>>> maybe in that sense Toya, we are in agreement.
>>>> It is only my commitment to reporting events such as the recent
>>>> massacre
>>>> in Guatemala that keeps me from leaving this list.  I try to remember
>>>> that, no matter how frustrated I may become, my frustration is nothing
>>>> in
>>>> comparison with the struggles against injustice that are taking place
>>>> all
>>>> over the world.
>>>> solid., bb
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> www-features mailing list
>>> www-features at lists.indymedia.org
>>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/www-features
>> _______________________________________________
>> www-features mailing list
>> www-features at lists.indymedia.org
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/www-features

More information about the www-features mailing list