[New-imc] Re: [IMC-Process] ST. LOUIS (response to membership criteria and other questions)

[praccus]

One vote for go ahead from me, a few notes inline

> (St. Louis IMC responses in all caps)

> IMC MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA 

> Each IMC and Global Working Group is expected to: 

> a. Agree in spirit to the NIMC Mission Statement and Principles of Unity,

> WE AGREE IN OUR SPIRITS, BODIES AND MINDS.

> b. Have a committed membership substantial enough to sustain a functional 
> IMC

> WE HAVE A GROUP OF ABOUT 8 DEDICATED PEOPLE AND OVER 20 ON THE LISTSERVE. 
> WE CURRENTLY HAVE A FULLY FUNTIONING SITE (http://www.stlimc.org/) ON AN 
> INDEPENDENT SERVER, SO I BELIEVE IT IS APPARENT THAT OUR MEMBERSHIP IS 
> "SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO SUSTAIN A FUNCTIONAL IMC."

I agree, especially since you are running it on your own server.

> c. Have open and public meetings (no one group can have exclusionary 
> "ownership" of an IMC),

> ALL OF OUR MEETINGS ARE "OPEN AND PUBLIC." THEY ARE ANNOUNCED ON THE 
> COMMUNITY CALENDAR, FOUND ON THE WEBSITE, AND THE MINUTES FROM THESE 
> MEETINGS ARE POSTED ON OUR NEWSWIRE.

> d. Work toward developing a local Mission Statement or Statement of 
> Purpose. Network Mission Statement may be adopted or used on an interim 
> basis,

> OUR MISSION STATEMENT: 
> ST. LOUIS INDYMEDIA PROVIDES AN OPEN FORUM FOR THE EXPLORATION AND EXPANSION 
> OF EGALITARIAN EXPRESSIONS. A GRASSROOTS AND OFTEN-RADICAL PERSPECTIVE ON 
> LOCAL AND REGIONAL ARTISTIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, POLITICAL, ACTIVIST AND SOCIAL 
> JUSTICE ISSUES. WE AIM TO BE AS INCLUSIVE AS POSSIBLE. THIS SITE DEPENDS 
> UPON YOUR ACTIVE PARTICIPATION VIA OPEN POSTINGS AND COMMENTARY.

Cool. Nice and succinct

> e. Establish and publish an editorial policy which is developed and 
> functions through democratic process, and with full transparency,

> WE HAVE NOT ESTABLISHED AN EDITORIAL POLICY FOR THE FEATURED ARTICLES. 
> CURRENTLY WHATEVER WE DEEM IMPORTANT ENOUGH MAKES IT. THESE TEND TO BE 
> ARTICLES RESEARCHED/WRITTEN BY SOMEONE IN THE COLLECTIVE. 
> OUR POLICY FOR ARTICLES ON THE NEWSWIRE IS: 
> [1] IF THREE OR MORE COPIES OF THE SAME POST APPEAR, WE WILL KEEP THE MOST 
> CHRONOLOGICALLY CURRENT POST AND DELETE THE REST. 
> [2] WE WILL KEEP ALL OFFENSIVE/CONTROVERSIAL POSTS UP FOR DISCUSSION. (THIS 
> INCLUDES ANYTHING THAT IS RACIST, MISOGYNISTIC, ANTI-SEMITIC OR JUST OUTRIDE 
> CRUDE.)

I know this has been issue, so I'll state it plain. I'm happy that
they don't censor posts...moreso I see it as their game to play
(St Louis), not ours (global wking group[s])

> [3] PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE IS THE KEY INGREDIENT OF THE NEWSWIRE (AND OF IMC) 
> SO WE INTEND TO KEEP THE OPEN POSTING PROCESS AS TRANSPARENT AND OPEN AS 
> POSSIBLE. 
> THIS EDITORIAL POLICY HAS BEEN POSTED ON THE NEWSWIRE BUT CAN NOT BE FOUND 
> ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE SITE.

Ok cool. I reckon it's also good idea to link it off the sidebar etc for ease
of users finding it. Just opinions here, nothing more.

> (since responding to the membership criteria the st. louis imc has told the
> new-imc working group they've posted their editorial policy on their site)

> f. Agree to the use of Open Publishing as described in the NIMC Editorial 
> Policy [editorial collective comments: "We did agree that the term "Open 
> Publishing" was one that is still being defined by the Global Network 
> Collective, and we would wait and see what the results were before 
> rewriting this criteria],

> WE ADHERE TO THE STRICTEST FOR OF OPEN PUBLISHING THAT WAS ON THE OP 
> PROPOSAL (I.E. PROPOSALS #1 AND #2 OPTION A - WE HAVE A NEWSWIRE ON THE 
> FRONT PAGE OF THE SITE).

> g. Adopt a decision-making policy that is in alignment with consensus 
> principles which include open, transparent and egalitarian processes,

> WE ARE A COLLECTIVE OF INDIVIDUALS WHICH USE CONSENSUS BASED DECISION-MAKING 
> FOR ALL OF OUR PROPOSALS. YOU MAY EVEN GO AS FAR AS CALLING US 
> ANARCHISTS...shhhh.

I'd like to go further and say hope that St Louis IMC will do better than any
label can hold, but nevermind that

> h. Have a spokesperson(s) willing and capable of participating in the 
> global decision-making process and meetings as a rotating 
> liaison/representative, with a clear understanding of the responsibilities 
> that come with this role,

> THAT WOULD BE ME, VISHAL. I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING DISCUSSION ON THE PROCESS 
> LIST FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS AND ON THE COMMUNICATION LIST FOR AROUND SIX 
> MONTHS. SO I HAVE A VERY GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS EXPECTED.

Yep, better than me prolly

<snip>