[New-imc] New London -imc application / Summary and Emerging Consensus

[boud]

hi everyone,
   Thanks for that synthesis, petros.

####
SUMMARY:
 i dissent ;) just on one process point: it seems to me that we have
no reason to abandon the idea that an individual block/veto, provided
that it is for a fundamental reason, is part of the consensus
process. The LWG made a block, which *could* have been for a serious
reason, but since this reason (problem) was a lack of communication,
it is clear that this problem no longer holds, and the LWG has itself
withdrawn the block. So it seems to me that there is no longer
any block.  
####


On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Petros Evdokas wrote:

> Emerging Consensus:
> There seems to be general agreement that the way this
> objection was raised, is not in keeping with the
> process of consensus.

i would say rather that the objection was raised rather aggressively,
but that that is not enough to dismiss the objection. The practical
question is whether the objection is for a fundamental reason or not.

* block by richard:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2002-October/004091.html

> We object 100% to this application.
> 
> This application and the decision to make this application have
> been made by one [unnamed] London group without any previous
> notification, consultation or discussion whatsoever about it on
> any public UK (or European) Indymedia list - despite the fact

This *could* be a fundamental reason, if the "unnamed London group" 
refused to enter into constructive communication with the "LWG".

However, it's clear from, e.g., the imc-uk-process archive (and this list
itself) that discussion is underway and the LWG can no longer say that
it has not been notified!
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-uk-process/2002-October/

* withdrawal of objection by richard + toni, since 
- notification, consultation and discussion are now underway
(richard + toni clearly are aware of the proposal)
- toni suggests outreach actions which should be taken for IMC London
and wishes the "LWG" and the "unnamed group" to work together

http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2002-October/004121.html
> [detailed discussion of actual points in these disagreements I confine to uk-
> process]
...
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-uk-process/2002-October/000860.html
> Lets go forward with this(?)


* support for IMC London proposal and offer to take outreach action by toni:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-uk-process/2002-October/000860.html
> as of your "let's get on with working on indymedia", i propose:
> 
>    -------------------------------------------------------------
>   | let's do the application for imc-london together, including |
>   | openning up of the process to others (see fact 2) who have  |
>   | been excluded so far.                                       |
>    -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> this should include an letter(email) of invitation to not only imc-uk
> email lists, but to all the independent media makers, and other
> potentialy interested, who reside in london in any way
> (permanent/nomadic).

i would suggest to toni that when sending out invitations,
copies be made to an appropriate imc-uk-* or imc-london* list,
to make it clear that these are constructive messages meant to
encourage a wide coalition of london-based people struggling for
their own human rights and/or other people's human rights 
and/or environmental rights to get involved.

i'd like to echo petros' words here:

> Friends, Ana, Andi, Tony, and others of the new London
> -imc group, as soon as you are ready, we would need you
> to refer to 
> http://newimc.indymedia.org , which is the best place
> to find information 
> about the organizational steps necessary to form an
> IMC. Most of you are familiar with those already, but
> given the climate surrounding this particular
> application, it will be better if the new  London -imc
> group follows everything in there with attention to
> detail, so as to make the application impeccable.

solidarity
boud