[New-imc] suggestions for IMC Rogue situation

[boud]

hi nick, everyone,
   nick: It's clear that loel withdrew his block (whether or not it was
valid, it was withdrawn), and here:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-process/2003-April/004756.html
it is clear that IMC Rogue is quite happy to continue with you as 
new-imc liaison (but is neutral on the IMC Houston conflict).

So here are the possibilities i see that you could announce/propose
on imc-process/imc-communication:

(1) declare IMC Rogue as approved without any further developments

(2) declare a new 7-day deadline on imc-process, with blocks from
individuals still possible

(3) declare a new 7-day deadline on imc-process, with only blocks from
local IMCs, via their liaisons, to count as blocks

(4) "negotiate" with andy to ask him to withdraw his block


IMHO, (3) would be the best option, since it would be an experiment
with a shift which everybody seems to feel is necessary anyway.


Pros and cons with the others are, IMHO:
(1) 
con - requires invalidating one person's right to block, in which
case, why not go to (3) rather than focussing on an individual?
pro - the reasons for the block were clearly responded to, so maybe
nobody would complain

(2) 
con - fair chance of a new block 
pro - maybe there will not be any new individual block

(4) 
con - the person who blocked writes very long mails, might not withdraw
the block, and it would be dishonest to pretend he has a right to block
if we're going to ignore it anyway
pro - the person who blocked is a human being - and may well accept to
withdraw the block

   "Running code and rough consensus"

i suggest you (nick) pick whichever of (1)-(4) (or other?) seems the
most reasonable. My guess is you'd probably get general support for
any of these options.

solidarity
boud