[imc-nepal] Re: [New-imc] Proposed Nepal IMC

boud imc-nepal at lists.indymedia.org, mathura at healthnet.org.np
Sat, 20 Jul 2002 21:28:54 +0200 (CEST)


stephen, 
  Thanks for all your answers:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-nepal/2002-July/000012.html

i think IMC Nepal is clearly looking like a very good project. :)
Still requires a lot of organising/communicating work by the locals,
but i think dri will do a great job in helping them (and you) through
the process...


IMHO, i think your answers to (1b) and (3a) give very complete answers
to bart's worry on how to get imc news from "Maoist areas", at least
you know the situation way better than i do (for obvious reasons!).

On Sat, 20 Jul 2002, Bart wrote:

> I think their answers are quite clear. They're mostly a bunch of
> intellectuals & there are no Mao´sts involved. This can be a problem
> & we need to find out how they'll get imc news from mao´st
> area's. They're after all a quite big anticapitalist resistance
> group, it would be a shame if there isn't news from them.

Please don't be offended by bart's blunt style ;). i think he once
said he's even more blunt face-to-face ;), though i've never met
him, so i don't really know.



dear mathura, dri, stephen,
  i think i have just more one practical suggestion to make:

Given the security situation, you may want to have some mailing lists
which are less open than is the usually the case. My feeling is to
maximise the chances of proper information flow and communication,
while allowing people needing safety to have this (if they judge it is
practical), you should have several lists, and *at least one* which 
is *totally open*, and to which at least some people involved
in Nepal subscribe to so that they can both show what they are
doing, and respond to criticism or worries.

Normally to make new lists, you can use the newlist.indymedia.org
site, but it is broken at the moment, so instead you can email
listwork%20at%20lists.indymedia.org (remember, this also has public
archives!) to ask to create new lists.

For example, you might want to have:

imc-nepal: (like at present)
Usage - advised for discussion which can be very open and public,
maybe more for a mix of outsiders and Nepal people who feel they
are not at risk
 - anyone can post without moderation, including non-subscribers
 - archives public
 - spamtrap in place to minimise spam
 - list of subscribers viewable to other subscribers (but not general
websurfers)


imc-nepal-private:
 Usage - advised for people who need more security (though not
100.00%, which is impossible on the internet), i.e. so that Nepal
people can use this "internally" without having to worry that they'll
be targets of govt and/or Maoists.

 - only subscribers can post
 - messages from non-subscribers require moderation from the list
administrator
 - archives private
 - list of subscribers only viewable by list administrator


Of course, when you specialise with things like editorial list, 
e.g. imc-nepal-edito, you will have to judge in each case which level
of security is needed.

And of course, you might want different names for the lists, 
e.g. imc-nepal-external for the totally open one, and 
imc-nepal-internal for the very secure one.

But based on past experience of IMCs with problems, i really feel
there should be at least one list which is totally open. Also, based
on experience with IMC India and the imc-india mailing list, i think
it is also important that at least a few people among the people
running the IMC Nepal site (or IMC Kathmandu site?) *really are
subscribed* to this "open" list, and respond to people on that list.


Looking forward to progress towards IMC Nepal (or IMC Kathmandu)!
boud (new-imc & IMC PL volunteer)