[Imc-lwg-work] Re: [Imc-uk-process] Reply to richard - was "Liason to the global Communication list" on UK Process

[Richard Malter]

>>This is perhaps the key part. You are incorrect becuase you miss
>>point *3) above. LWG is part of IMC UK. LWG is part of IMC UK process. So
>>you using any UK tag means that you are representing LWG. We are LWG of IMC 
>>UK.
>>So when you use the UK tag you are referring to us. Which we do not agree to.
>>Therefore you cannot use the UK tag.

Quoting Planet Mail <planet-mail@pop3.poptel.org.uk>:
>**See arguments above + Again to re-state, you are a small group of
>a couple of people with your own email lists where you make your own
>decisions and working practices outside of those used by everyone
>else working on imc uk.

>**It's also very interesting that you make such a strong assertion
>that LWG is part of IMC UK, and part of IMC UK process. 

no assertion. it is a fact.

>Since no where on
>the IMC UK process list have you sought approval for being a liaison on the 
>imc-communications list. 

* Dave, you did in fact only list 2 points. you miss point 3. You may not like 
point 3 but it is a fact despite your feelings and thoughts about it.

* You are in disagreement with Jordi also in your group. He agreed with us that 
we can choose, as one group, our liason from our group. So you are now talking 
as an individual, becuase you do not have agreement within your group. Then 
note that we didn't call ourselves 'UK' anything, which is what you proposed to 
do - to represent yourselves globally as.

>>>So we have a situation where someone who is already a listed
>>>Liaison on the
>>>IMC Communications list for their own small group is trying to
>>>prevent the
>>>IMC UK process list from deciding on their own Liaison, with
>>>the
>>>arguments
>>>used not actually being true.
>
>>Nope. * you are again trying to imply that LWG is not part of IMC
>>UK process * !

>**No I am stating FACT (although the last bit "with the arguments
>used not 
>actually being true" being my VIEW).
>Do you actually deny that you are listed on imc-communication as
>LWG Liaison, 

its a useless question, its publicly archived. 

>that you are from a small group, and that you are trying
>to prevent everyone else on the IMC UK process list from deciding
>their Liaisons?
Again
>>You have reasoned based on wrong information. And so you are
>>incorrect.

>**I disagree.

It is not a question of whether you disagree or not. You have reasoned on wrong 
information. You imply things then build an interpretation on that. See above 
point 3.  

>We are
>part of IMC UK, and part of IMC UK process. We have blocked Tony's
>proposal, as
>part of IMC UK process. That is all. You have made the same
>mistake as Tony did
>on imc-communication. There are no 'coincidences'.


> >It's also worth noting that there can be more than one liaison
from
> >a local
> >imc on the IMC communication list.
>
>Nope, this is incorrect. You have invented this. 

My complete apology, Dave, i misread you completely. You are of course accurate 
on this. I am sorry about that.

>**No one from the IMC UK Process list has blocked you being a
>Liaison on 
>the imc-communications list, despite the fact that you have not had
>any 
>support for it or gone through any process on either the IMC UK
>Process 
>list or your own LWG lists.

see above.

>**I think it's time you stopped trying to exert your own individual
>will on 
>everyone else and tried a more collaborative approach.
>Local IMC's on the ground are not the same as email only based
>global 
>decision making groups and global lists.

Dave, how helpful would it be if i wrote:
"**I think it's time that the London collective stopped trying to control 
Indymedia UK, stop breaking the Membership-Criteria document of the Indymedia 
Network on two or three counts at least, a long etc etc"

suggest: you make actual proposals, as i did two in reply to Arne's mail.

Also, maybe most importantly, to take a more collaborative approach you have to 
first internally understand that this is not a conflict.

Richard
---
lwg (of imc uk)
---