[New-imc] info@imc-vl.org

[tuc2002 at fastmail.fm]

Dear Lize,
Thanks for your support and constructive relation-seeking. We indeed seek
to hide IMC-be bashing articles on our website because we think they
don't have a place in the newswire. It's not the same as silencing our
criticism on IMC.be (which would be guarding an IMC from critical
examination), but we don't want to make things worse than they are.
That's why people editing the content started individually hiding
articles like "this piece was hidden on IMC.be, those bastards". The
consensus is that if this sentence is left out, we'd apply our own Edito
Policy on it, regardless of what IMC-be would do with the article. I
guess that is the most fair solution. People who want to publish should
not behave childish in turning the IMC-Vlaanderen website into a carbon
copy of the hidden pages of IMC.be. In all: I guess criticism of IMC.be
should be directed at IMC.be, not published on IMC-vl.

I wanted to make a few remarks on your e-mail though:

1) I would not call the discussions we are having now "progress". In
fact, this "progress" has been there long ago, but it was made in
reply-all lists, because we were discussing what to do with our
frustration and ideas. In May for example, most if not all discussion was
about Edito Policy, the comment-function, democratic decisionmaking, and
techie stuff. What people saw on the public forum were indeed a few
problematic posts of individuals. It's a pity that these were public and
the positive work wasn't being done in public. What happened in the lasts
weeks is that the positive work is being done more and more through
public channels. You called it "progress", but it is only a difference in
visibility. Let me take the example of the discussions on the IMC-WVL and
-Liège proposal. We had the stupid situation wherein the proposal was
"attacked" on the public forum by individuals (who afterwards apologized
for stepping on toes, but still made some intelligent remarks), which
made some people -rightfully- angry with us, but at the same time we were
discussing how we could deal constructively with the proposal. This
constructive communication, too, did find it's way to the forum later on.
That why I was trying to unheat all this e-mail quarreling a few weeks
ago. Perceptions where just not right, in a great part because of us. All
negative communication was directly made public (and you can count how
many posts this takes), while all positive communication was on reply-all
lists, not visible for uninvolved people.
We are indeed no good communication specialists. We'd beter have some
spindoctors around, Alister Cambel-alike people. ;)

Anyway, reply-all communication has stopped now, since we decided to have
all discussions on the forum and since we discovered we have a
mailinglist available from IMC. ;) We are making up now what to use for
which communication. Keep yourself up-to-date.

2) Another remark in this respect: IMC-vl was heavily critised for
actions of individual mebers of IMC-vl. This was particulary true
regarding stances towards the proposal of IMC-WVL and -Liège. Now,
without pointing fingers, I think the people at IMC-vl did quite a good
job in discussing that proposal. To be more specific: I think the forum
of IMC-vl is the only place where you would right now find such in-depth
and thorough discussions on the proposal of IMC-WVL and -Liège. I think a
lot of criticism toward IMC-vl about communication was correct, but on
the other hand we are the ones that took the proposal serious (be it the
ones who liked it or the ones who didn't). Without downplaying criticisms
concerning us: I felt this part of reality was ignored. We were only
targeted because of some individual postings, nobody mentioned we were
the only ones actually discussing the whole thing collectively and
in-depth.

3) "I hope the imc.vl collective will not get into the same political
propaganda making error as imc.be did during the elections, because it is
already clear that a lot of people behind imc.vl are also involved in
setting up a new political party in Belgium."
I'm afraid this is completely incorrect. And I mean completely. I don't
know where you got that information (or maybe I don't want to know?). I
didn't even know a new party was being formed in Belgium. Secondly, if "a
lot of people behind imc.vl are also involved in setting up" this new
party, then please tell me who. The only one who I think makes a chance
of being part of such a new party project is Jan D. It is his right, and
he decided not to be part of the edito-team of IMC-vl because he is
party-affiliated. I guess you cannot tell that for others. Even then, I
don't know myself if he is involved in that new project. So bassicaly, as
far as I know "a lot of people behind imc.vl" is in reality a very small
amount of people who decided not to be part of the content-managing team
of IMC-vl: one person who could be involved but of whom I don't know if
he's indeed involved. If there are others you'd like to name, be my
guest.
So please question the source that provided you with this information.
It's plain lies and insinuations. IMC-vl is not involved in any party,
nor are "a lot of people behind IMC-vl" involved in the making of a new
party. In my view that would contradict the IMC-principles, and IMC-vl
was set up in order to live by this principles. For god sake: that was
our main critique of IMC-be!
Even if after a few General Meetings some people show up that are
party-affiliated (although I wouldn't know who), they would still make up
for a minority in the collective. But more important: these people
interested in the IMC-vl project would not be interested in using it as a
pure propaganda function (you know which parties are known for what sort
of behaviour). In that respect I think Jan D's decision not to be part of
the edito-team is a far-reaching decision.

"I hope the imc.vl collective will not get into the same political
propaganda making error as imc.be did during the elections". In light of
my comments above: I can tell you IMC-vl is not going to make this error.
But see for yourself in the future: I hope you'll like the results on
IMC-vl. On the other hand, I'm happy that some people of IMC.be reckon
what problems that particular IMC has, although Turlututu just left
IMC.be.

Please feel free communicating with us about all these issues.
Particulary the insinuations can only be stopped by communication and
getting to know each other.

But again: thanks for your constructive and positive stance on all these
things. I really respect this.

greetings,
TUc




Lize wrote:

Hi all,

The testsite of Indymedia Vlaanderen is now on for more than a month.
According to me, some progress has been made since my last mail
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/new-imc/2003-August/004187.html  

As the imc.vl collective stated, they wanted to turn their endless
criticism on imc.be into a positive project by making Indymedia
themselves. On the process list of the testsite, the enormous waste of
energy on imc.be bashing seems to be ended and they finally got to work.
They made already 3 features. They are consistently hiding imc.be
bashing articles on their site. They send out positive signs asking to
work together with the other collectives and divide tasks.

One feature is taken over from imc.wvl with most of the articles coming
from imc.be, which proves a kind of imc networking in Belgium is
starting to get some shape. In my imc.be feature on Cancun I was also
happy to be able to take over the Cancun action agenda from imc.vl.

So I still think the Indymedia Vlaanderen project/site should go ahead.
If the collectives can't work together, it's better to work separately,
instead of not working and wasting all energy on bashing each other. I
guess with some imc experience the imc.vl collective will also
understand better some of the imc.be situations they criticized so hard
in their pre-imc.vl life.

After working a while and getting some experience I think (hope) a kind
of spontaneous task division will get along between the different
collectives. It is clear that it is stupid to do double work and as the
present imc.be collective is really too small, another group of people
helping to cover is very welcome in Belgium. I don't think the
overlapping region is a problem, after all this discussion was never
about regional but political division. 

The proposal of solving the discussion with a portal site is really too
complicated, I am sorry but it seems like a concept of a 'business plan'
to me. Like all grassroot movements, the Indymedia making in Belgium
will get shape by working and by action, not by endless theoretical
discussions about decision trees and competence divisions. I am
confident that we will find practical solutions as soon as practical
problems are presenting themselves. Let's not imitate our enemies and
leave the abstract thinking behind.

Finally, I hope the imc.vl collective will not get into the same
political propaganda making error as imc.be did during the elections,
because it is already clear that a lot of people behind imc.vl are also
involved in setting up a new political party in Belgium.

So, in my view, go ahead with making Indymedia Vlaanderen an official
imc centre.

Regards,

Lize
-- 
  
  tuc2002 at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Choose from over 50 domains or use your own