[IMC-bristol] removal of bunker feature

[ian]

This has all been handled quite ungracefully.

An explanation should have been posted to the list explaining why this 
feature was removed.  It didn't happen and naturally Tony was pissed.

To correct el geezer - I don't author articles and promote them straight 
away to the middle column.  I have on occasion picked up on important 
stories written by a third party and have promoted them up to the middle 
column IF there is no other relevant news ( my philospohy is to keep the 
middle column rolling 2-3 times a week in order to keep the website looking 
fresh -  Most people are aware of that and I've received no complaints 
about this so far)

There was a clear consensus to remove this article as a feature at the 
meeting on Monday - which I believe Tony can choose to abide by or not 
(consensus being the agreed form of working). It was his choice to leave 
the meeting early.   My personal concern was that Tony posted this article 
up without the permission of the author (Phil Chamberlain - ex deputy 
editor of the bath chronicle) -  apparently Tony is claiming that he has 
the copyright now for this article so that's not a problem.  This is a 
valid concern as he has been threatened on numerous occasions for breach of 
copyright.

If he had added the intro which he has put on his posting to the UK site 
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/280247.html  then maybe this 
incident would not have occurred.  By writing continuously on your feature 
that you are being censored is again clearly not true - and by repeatedly 
posting this up is an abuse of your password and in my opinion demonstrates 
a lack of group solidarity.   It has obviously  appeared to some people 
that Tony is acting in a particularly partisan manner.  I guess the lesson 
to be learnt here is when dealing with possible contentious stories its 
best to check with the list B4 you post a feature rather than crying wolf 
after.

I enjoyed the article although I thought that a lot of it was speculation 
that has been in the public domain for donkeys...  but it was relevant for 
the site and potentially a relevant feature - it was just all handled in an 
ungraceful manner though by all parties concerned.  For the sake of peace 
in the valley - i'd like to see this reposted as a feature.   Anyone object?


best
ian