[CIMC-working] Re: PROPOSED FEATURE: Northern Illinois Confederation of P...
ChrisGeovanis@aol.com
ChrisGeovanis at aol.com
Thu, 28 Nov 2002 13:37:54 EST
--part1_20.3472ca6.2b17bc82_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I support getting this feature up asap. Who's taking the lead?
christine
In a message dated 11/27/2002 8:33:42 AM Central Standard Time,
being@enteract.com writes:
> Subj:[CIMC-working] Re: PROPOSED FEATURE: Northern Illinois Confederation of
> Peac
> Date:11/27/2002 8:33:42 AM Central Standard Time
> From:<A HREF="mailto:being@enteract.com">being@enteract.com</A>
> To:<A HREF="mailto:ianb@colorstudy.com">ianb@colorstudy.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:garthliebhaber@hotmail.com">garthliebhaber@hotmail.com</A>
> CC:<A HREF="mailto:imc-chicago-working@lists.indymedia.org">imc-chicago-working@lists.indymedia.org</A>
> Sent from the Internet
>
>
>
> Ian,
> Your ideas about features are very productive and helpful. And you are
> approaching this at the level the CIMC has approached features for some
> time.
>
> However, I think this focus is much to intense a level of approach for
> sustainable feature production.
> We need to think much smaller, but still do quality stuff.
>
> The feature space is meant to highlight thiings that we would like people
> to know about.
> I think we are setting way too high a bar for what is a feature in these
> discussions.
>
> We have not had a feature in 3 weeks. If none other are forthcoming I
> suggest we make minor tweeks and this one up.
>
> In my mind, what Garth has described below in his paragraphs without any
> elaboration or other links is enough for a short feature. This is a
> significant conference or event. I passed the ball on this due to too many
>
> critiques but I think I should have stuck by it.
>
> I think this should go up with a bit of text tweaking and add a sentence
> about the contacts.
> There can be follow up features on the local peace stuff to give more
> details.
>
> Best, Doug
>
> At 01:01 AM 11/27/02 -0600, Ian Bicking wrote:
> >On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 00:41, Garth Liebhaber wrote:
> > > Hello Doug, Ian and gang,
> > > read through the discussion on proposed feature. The point of the
> > > article wasn't so much that a new group was formed as it was to give a
> > sense
> > > of what was going on west of 355. This evening I added on a specific
> list
> > > of group contacts with summaries of what each of those groups was up
> to. I
> > > also have a few pics to add. The Peace Confederacy- it's so weird to
> use
> > > that word- is more akin to being called a Conference or the like.
> > > Perhaps if there were regular articles being posted under the topic
> of
> > > 'west of chicago metro actions', it would be easier to form it into a
> > > feature under such. as well as for chicago. I've been encouraging
> folks
> > > involved in groups to post articles on their events. people are
> > looking at
> > > the site and warming up to it...
> > > What do you say about making a call to peace groups to post
> > articles
> > > of their ongoing activities and forming it into a feature? of course
> Dec.
> > > 7th and 8th is coming up. Perhaps this can be a good rallying point to
> > > build around? This could also be a good way to get
> > participation/support of
> > > the site if groups can see it as being for them.
> >
> >I'm no good at this sort of stuff -- to what degree I'm involved in
> >content it's pretty much editorial, not journalistic (i.e., not doing
> >the hard work ;). But if you and perhaps some other people are willing
> >to do this, that would be great. Even better (as I think about it, much
> >better), if you can convince a few groups to post their own articles
> >summarizing what they are up too, compiling those would be a great
> >feature. On the development/outreach side, getting groups to post stuff
> >on their own is probably our biggest goal. If one of them is doing
> >something exciting, that can be a feature on its own. If it's just a
> >simple update on what they're doing, a few together would be a fine
> >feature.
> >
> >We also have done "week in review" features. How often is based in part
> >on what's gone on, but also in large part on the effort of compiling
> >them and the energy of the person doing it. Any of this stuff could be
> >part of a week in review feature. If anyone is keeping track, a week in
> >review that's simply a list of links to CIMC-local/original content
> >would be good, and only require monitoring of the newswire. (Such a
> >feature is obviously just a hack to get around the shortcoming of not
> >having a split wire, but until the wire is split it's useful).
> >
> > Ian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imc-chicago-working mailing list
> Imc-chicago-working@lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-chicago-working
>
--part1_20.3472ca6.2b17bc82_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">I support getting this feature up asap. Who's taking the lead?<BR>
<BR>
christine<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 11/27/2002 8:33:42 AM Central Standard Time, being@enteract.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Subj:<B>[CIMC-working] Re: PROPOSED FEATURE: Northern Illinois Confederation of Peac </B><BR>
Date:11/27/2002 8:33:42 AM Central Standard Time<BR>
From:<A HREF="mailto:being@enteract.com">being@enteract.com</A><BR>
To:<A HREF="mailto:ianb@colorstudy.com">ianb@colorstudy.com</A>, <A HREF="mailto:garthliebhaber@hotmail.com">garthliebhaber@hotmail.com</A><BR>
CC:<A HREF="mailto:imc-chicago-working@lists.indymedia.org">imc-chicago-working@lists.indymedia.org</A><BR>
<I>Sent from the Internet </I><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Ian,<BR>
Your ideas about features are very productive and helpful. And you are <BR>
approaching this at the level the CIMC has approached features for some time.<BR>
<BR>
However, I think this focus is much to intense a level of approach for <BR>
sustainable feature production.<BR>
We need to think much smaller, but still do quality stuff.<BR>
<BR>
The feature space is meant to highlight thiings that we would like people <BR>
to know about.<BR>
I think we are setting way too high a bar for what is a feature in these <BR>
discussions.<BR>
<BR>
We have not had a feature in 3 weeks. If none other are forthcoming I <BR>
suggest we make minor tweeks and this one up.<BR>
<BR>
In my mind, what Garth has described below in his paragraphs without any <BR>
elaboration or other links is enough for a short feature. This is a <BR>
significant conference or event. I passed the ball on this due to too many <BR>
critiques but I think I should have stuck by it.<BR>
<BR>
I think this should go up with a bit of text tweaking and add a sentence <BR>
about the contacts.<BR>
There can be follow up features on the local peace stuff to give more details.<BR>
<BR>
Best, Doug<BR>
<BR>
At 01:01 AM 11/27/02 -0600, Ian Bicking wrote:<BR>
>On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 00:41, Garth Liebhaber wrote:<BR>
> > Hello Doug, Ian and gang,<BR>
> > read through the discussion on proposed feature. The point of the<BR>
> > article wasn't so much that a new group was formed as it was to give a <BR>
> sense<BR>
> > of what was going on west of 355. This evening I added on a specific list<BR>
> > of group contacts with summaries of what each of those groups was up to. I<BR>
> > also have a few pics to add. The Peace Confederacy- it's so weird to use<BR>
> > that word- is more akin to being called a Conference or the like.<BR>
> > Perhaps if there were regular articles being posted under the topic of<BR>
> > 'west of chicago metro actions', it would be easier to form it into a<BR>
> > feature under such. as well as for chicago. I've been encouraging folks<BR>
> > involved in groups to post articles on their events. people are <BR>
> looking at<BR>
> > the site and warming up to it...<BR>
> > What do you say about making a call to peace groups to post <BR>
> articles<BR>
> > of their ongoing activities and forming it into a feature? of course Dec.<BR>
> > 7th and 8th is coming up. Perhaps this can be a good rallying point to<BR>
> > build around? This could also be a good way to get <BR>
> participation/support of<BR>
> > the site if groups can see it as being for them.<BR>
><BR>
>I'm no good at this sort of stuff -- to what degree I'm involved in<BR>
>content it's pretty much editorial, not journalistic (i.e., not doing<BR>
>the hard work ;). But if you and perhaps some other people are willing<BR>
>to do this, that would be great. Even better (as I think about it, much<BR>
>better), if you can convince a few groups to post their own articles<BR>
>summarizing what they are up too, compiling those would be a great<BR>
>feature. On the development/outreach side, getting groups to post stuff<BR>
>on their own is probably our biggest goal. If one of them is doing<BR>
>something exciting, that can be a feature on its own. If it's just a<BR>
>simple update on what they're doing, a few together would be a fine<BR>
>feature.<BR>
><BR>
>We also have done "week in review" features. How often is based in part<BR>
>on what's gone on, but also in large part on the effort of compiling<BR>
>them and the energy of the person doing it. Any of this stuff could be<BR>
>part of a week in review feature. If anyone is keeping track, a week in<BR>
>review that's simply a list of links to CIMC-local/original content<BR>
>would be good, and only require monitoring of the newswire. (Such a<BR>
>feature is obviously just a hack to get around the shortcoming of not<BR>
>having a split wire, but until the wire is split it's useful).<BR>
><BR>
> Ian<BR>
<BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
Imc-chicago-working mailing list<BR>
Imc-chicago-working@lists.indymedia.org<BR>
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-chicago-working<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_20.3472ca6.2b17bc82_boundary--