[New-imc] Re: [Dns] cancun - second attempt.

[Micah Anderson]

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003, CMI wrote:

> Folks, it would be really good to get cancun.indymedia.org up there ASAP
> 
> please see my previous mail. 
> http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/dns/2003-July/000963.html
> 
> if there's a problem with doing this, can we open discussion also ASAP? 
> thanks.

I think the issue is that this is not an approved IMC. Why does this
matter? Well the original reason we put together the new IMC process
was because people were running around asking the tech people to do
work for this new/awesome/inspiring/amazing/important IMC that
was being started. Many times we would spend hours setting up an IMC,
customizing it, taking up disk space, only to see it wither and be a
useless waste of time and resources. See the Congo for a good example.

The other issue was the colonizing IMC aspect of activists from other
places than the place where the IMC was being setup (for example
prague) showing up and setting up an IMC for a protest there. It was
all done in good faith and for good reasons, but ended up being a
ragged IMC with no local support at all, which we would have to kill
off later because it was becoming a huge spam database.

I am not saying that you guys are doing this, in fact you specifically
state otherwise in this email, but the DNS group has,
ever since we setup a process for new IMCs, set up DNS for IMCs that
the new-imc group approves. There are many issues around setting up
IMCs that the new-imc group is empowered to work through with the IMC
in question so that the IMC is deemed worth our time, effort,
resources and support. The tech group was the ones who would decide to
go ahead with a new imc, mostly because we had the access and the
knowledge to get things setup, but we didn't like that power,
especially when it was causing us to have little sleep and a lot of
work. That is why we asked that the new-imc group be formed around
policies and requirements that can be developed in that group, so that
the decision can be made by non-techies and techies alike. 

I guess what I am saying is... as a sub-group of IMC-tech, the dns
group of people is not going to make the decision that this IMC should
be approved or sanctioned by the entire IMC. That would be a step back
from all the hard work that has been done in putting together a
functional working group around the new-imc process, and would not be
fair to the new-imc working group if we (and honstly, it is realy only
about 3 of us who do regular DNS changes here) were to make a
unilateral decision to approve this.

If the new-imc working group decides, then we will be more than happy
to do it.

micah

> 
> the reason this is being posted to new-imc is because we may need to 
> discuss whether cancun is an IMC as such or not, currently it is not, as 
> there is currently NO local imc activity on the ground. Local people 
> have NOT asked for an imc to be set up and it is seen by the mexico and 
> chiapas imc people who are preparing an "independent media centre" as 
> opposed to  an "indymedia centre" in cancun that it would be arrogant to 
>  go ahead and set up an imc in cancun without local people.
> 
> we very much hope that the iniciative will be taken up by local people 
> to start, maintain and support a local imc and at that point they can go 
> through new-imc process. in the meantime... the very short mean time.. 
> all that really needs to be discussed, (digo yo) is whether 
> indymedia.org is going to loan the name cancun.indymedia.org and an 
> entry in cities.inc to the alternative media initiative in cancun or not.
> 
> thanks!
> 
> kino.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dns mailing list
> Dns at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/dns