[CIMC-working] (alleged cliqueishness at Houston IMC) FW: [IMC-Process] New IMC or reform Old IMC

[Chris Kaihatsu]

------ Forwarded Message
From: "Robert Graham" <grahamr@ev1.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 15:18:49 -0600
To: "National IMC process" <imc-process@lists.indymedia.org>
Subject: RE:[IMC-Process] New IMC or reform Old IMC

Greetings,

My name is Robert Graham.  I am a member of the IMC collective in Houston,
Texas and have been  active with this group since
August, and am joining this process list in hopes of finding answers to some
persistent internal problems in HIMC function (dysfunction would be a better
word for it).

It was serindipitous to discover Loel's post, with Nick Cooper's defensive
response, in the December 5 archives of this group (see below).  It serves
as an important starting point for my own concerns.   Loel was indeed
pressured out of the HIMC, and this was done at a meeting at which I was
present.  Though it is technically true that he left of his own accord, it
is also true that Nick Cooper put immense psychological pressure on him in
the course of that meeting.  As always, Nick was supported by a small group
of supporters, but his effort did NOT have the consensus of the entire
group.  Loel, already weary from months of struggle with another member of
the group (see Loel's earlier posts on this list), just decided to throw in
the towel for a while.  I sure hope he reconsiders -- we could really use
his help addressing the current problems in HIMC, which are directly related
to the ones he was trying to address when the "Nick clique"  pressured him
out of the organization.

It is surely no coincidence that the same little group of people whoLoel is
referring to as the "radio work group"  also hold a virtual monopoly on
password access to HIMC's website, and are refusing to enable interested
others who do editorial work on the website to gain equal access.  This has
followed on frequent neglect of editorial responsibility by those who hold
the only "keys" to publishing features on the site.  There is a long history
of editorial requests not meeting with the approval of this group being
ignored, and no one individual is ever considered responsible when this
happens.  Just this week, to show a typical example, several requests that I
had submitted to enhance a feature story were first employed as I had
requested, then completely removed about fifteen minutes later, all of this
without the slightest rational explanation.  I was told:  We just put that
up to show you how easy the process is, and someday, after the AVG process,
we will put it all in writing.

The AVG process, that stands for Action Guideline Violation.  This is
another area where serious abuse of IMC process has been taking place.  This
same group insisted that another very productive contributor to the website,
who like myself has requested (for over six months in his case) training to
enable him to assist in the website editing process, be charged with
"unconstructive activity,"  while themselves refusing to provide him the
training and access that would make him more  productive.  Clearly, they
are, as Loel indicated, conspiring to keep control of HIMC in a few hands,
in opposition to our mission statement which calls for the opposite.

I would hope that anyone in any other IMC who has ever experienced this kind
of destructive behavior can give us some suggestions on how to proceed.  I
am grateful for any advice you might offer.  I will alert the other
activist, Ken, about this list so that he can add to my report.

robert


loel@CoolRio.com writes:
> I just left the Houston IMC because it was taken over by a bunch of
neophyte, inexperienced, amateurs

It is true we're not professionals, but who did we take it over from?  You
chose to leave our group, but no one else has.  No one has been kicked out.

>who had not a clue as to what they were doing other than to make it their
own little

little?

>self-serving

We don't serve any of the people or causes we do stories about?

>and self-promoting

we do strive to do promotion

>clubhouse.

Does that imply that we sit around drinking, gambling and gossiping?  Surely
you are aware that we produce a primetime weekly radio show for Pacifica,
arrange monthly video screenings, maintain the site and do other extensive
IMC projects such as the FTAA video "Trading Freedom."

> They turned the consensus process into a star chamber to rid themselves of
anything about which they did not agree.

What things did we rid ourselves?

>It was a most disgusting and very undemocratic display.

What was?  The meeting you attended and charge another HIMC member witha
violation? The letter written in response to your threat of legal action?
To what are you referring?
 o
> Some of we who had concerns that were quashed without being resolved met
and came up with the same question.

You raised an charge against another HIMC member and no one in the room, not
even those who agreed with you that things had been handled badly regarding
the Pacifica radio show, supported your charges in a straw poll.  Or are you
referring to something else?

> Do we attempt to create another houston indymedia that is inclusive and
democratic; or, do we just get disillusioned and cynical and say: US people
are so socially conditioned as to be unable to do anything other than engage
in self promotion, greed, and power grabbing?

Assuming I am one of the people you feel has engaged in self-promotion,
greed or power-grabbing, exactly what do I get? What was my pay-off?

Peace
Nick Cooper

Here is my original report on some of the background of this:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-process/2002-July/003606.html




_______________________________________________
imc-process mailing list
imc-process@lists.indymedia.org
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-process


------ End of Forwarded Message