[IMC-bristol] please get it sorted

[v g]

Sorry to carry on but I consider this extremely important.  Its not about the person (in this case Tony) - its about BIMC and its irresponsibility and untrustworthiness.
How am I, or anyone else, supposed to have any confidence in BIMC when this sort of behaviour is going on behind the scenes?  Yes there is a lot going on out there, and I need to be able to trust the people behind our local independent media.  Until this issue is sorted out and explained satisfactorily this is not possible.  This dpoesnt need to be an issue dragged on forever, it needs to be faced and dealt with now, simply, with sense and fairness.
The recent mail from Ian with a quick "Fuck Off" is the most recent example of a giant problem.  Is BIMC going to deal with this or not?
All the advice that has been given by others around the globe, has suggested good practice that BIMC has chosen to ignore.  Nothing about the way this has been handled is right.
So, my problems with the Tony resolution:
 
1// Regarding the Tom Rintoul article, I think Tony Gosling has taken too much unnecessary blame for what Tom wrote.  Tom himself says that much of his article was based on the BIMC mailing list emails, and it is unclear what parts of his article are directly from Tony during the interview and what is not.  I personally think that the BIMC group have lost sight of the importance of this article:
1/ It was an article written for the Bristol Uni paper, so doesnt have a particular high readership.
2/ Before printing it was posted to BIMC, allowing everyone the ability to comment, complain and correct.
3/  As it was, the article never went to print anyway.
 
"Tony didnt "put his infectious guff in a university newspaper". I went to him for information, he gave it to me and I wrote an article based both on that and on emails to the list that have seen over the last four months. The way some of the comments on here read it looks as if people think Tony masterminded the whole thing to have a go at Ian which just isnt true. " Tom Rintoul
 
"I had already been on the list for several months by then so I had a fair idea of the debates going on internally but wanting more information I sent out an email to everyone on the list asking for comment or, if possible, an interview. Tony was the only person to reply and so I interviewed him. " Tom Rintoul
"I should have spread my net further when looking for comment on indymedia. I stand by my defense of Tony, I like him personally and I dont see why his having worked for the BBC should stop him contributing effectivly here. What he told me wasnt the problem, what I did with it was...  "Easton Anarchist Clique" and references to class war just sounded too good to pass up. The article suffered because of the emphasis I put on soundbites which I thought spiced it up a little. Not to mention the factual innacuracies. I went heavy on the slander and exagerated bimc's problems because I knew it would sound good to the feautures editor... That said, I do stand by the gist of my argument. I think that BIMC is dominated (wrongly) by activists and that this is, among other things, because of Ian's influence. " Tom Rintoul
 
"While I commend Tom for his forthright attempt to get to the heart of the BIMC malaise I never said Ian was in the SWP! " Tony Gosling
 
Perhaps the anger levelled at Tony for this article is misplaced and out of proportion?
 
 
2// Regarding the emails to anarchobabe, although I do agree that it is rude to send emails to someone when they have specifically asked not to be contacted that way, I think it could also be equally rude to send someone emails outside the mailing list when they have not given you permission to, and I have had an email from Ian asking to reveal myself and long emails from Kyra attempting to explain her bias.  Im not complaining, but again it does seem to be one rule for one...
Secondly, although Tonys quoted emails are extremely sarcastic sounding, there is nothing abusive, ranting or insulting in them.  He asks a valid question about  the removal of an article, and should have been given a response (I hope he was?).  His 'crime' was sending this question as an email instead of through the mailing list, but this is not something that only Tony does, judging by my inbox.
I also fail to see why Tony shouldnt describe himself as "A Member of BIMC", as it is his correct title, and the others of you should be entitled to use it also.  He doesnt at any point lead the reader to believe he speaks for all of BIMC.
 
3// Regarding emails to Kyra, she should perhaps back up the accusation with evidence so we may see how offensive or irritating those emails are?  Of course, with email, one can just delete it without reading if one wants.  As I myself have recieved a couple of unsolicited long emails from Kyra recently, again one rule for one...
4// Still no mention of Ians own emails and how (or whether) that should be dealt with.  Sam says he doesnt remember Ians behaviour coming up at the meeting, so can someone clarify this?  Ian has also in the past removed Tony as a moderator, without permission from the rest of the group.  Surely this is more of a problem than talking briefly with some student about BIMC?  And what about the threats of violence?
 
5// Ian has stepped down, you've kicked Tony out, and people not involved in either of their circles are left with no trust of BIMC.  There were better ways of dealing with all of this.  Tony scould have been reprimanded and given some sort of warning, and he should have been allowed to speak in his own defense.  Chucking him out was too harsh and not at all in proportion to the 'crimes' he is alleged to have committed.  Ian should have been reprimanded and given warning.  In both 'trials' they should have been allowed to defend, excuse or apologise for their actions.  In both 'trials' anyone with a personal dislike for them should have not been part of the decision making process.  
 
But neither of these people, (both who, as far as I can tell, offer a lot to the project in their own different ways) should have been forced to leave the group!  (I tried to send this days ago after I had signed off the list, but none of the mods would put my mail through to the list, so I had to sign back in... conspiracy or just not got round to it?)
  
The way Ian wrote in so quickly with an "Im back" and then a "fuck off" has made the situation even worse.  Am i the only one who can see the disrespect here, not just for Tony but for every BIMC user?
 
I object to non BIMC volunteers and anonymous users, such as myself, being told we're unimportant and can be ignored.  Or that people who cant make the meetings should be ignored.  BIMC has rapidly moved away from being about and for the people, and has become about and for a small dictatorial bunch.  Was it always like this?

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-bristol/attachments/20040319/d72eeef7/attachment-0001.htm