[New-imc] Online form: Proposed new IMC! (housing.indymedia.org)

[boud]

hi chuck,

On Wed, 1 Jan 2003, Chuck0 wrote:

> boud wrote:
> 
> > 
> >>have to take a hard line on IMCs being location-based? If we can put
> >>together a network of people to do this project in Indymedia
> >>fashion, then why should anybody else care?
> > 
> > 
> > Because Indymedia is a network. If the network you propose is
> > composed of people working constructively with their local IMCs,
> > then it could, in principle, be part of the network, but there's no
> > particular reason to call it an IMC, rather use a more modest and realistic
> > term such as a "mailing list based working group".
> 
> Why can't a local IMC be just a "mailing list based working group".

Given the length of time that you've been involved in Indymedia,
i find it surprising that you need to ask this question.

Nevertheless, i will assume your question is serious - so, please
RTFM:
 
http://newimc.indymedia.org

> How do we post multimedia on a mailing list?

We don't. 

Please read:
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/GlobalThemes

> >>I think there is a real need for a non-local IMC dedicated to housing, 
> > 
> > 
> > i would think that housing is an issue which particularly *needs*
> > grounding in local IMCs.
> 
> Some local IMCs are doing good work on housing, but housing activists could 
> be stronger if they had a way to network and share news with activists in 
> other cities. If housing activists in Key West, Florida post news to the 
> local IMC about the crackdown there on the homeless, how are activists San 
> Francisco or San Jose going to know about it?

Because, e.g.

(1) the housing activists in Key West get involved in their local IMC,
get into contact with feminists, individuals from colour justice
groups, environmental groups, LGBT groups, peace groups etc. who are
already cooperating in the IMC and come to a consensus on making a
category/filter/feature on housing on the local IMC, and on
experimenting to get feeds on housing from other sites.  They (and the
others) benefit from the networking and mutual support of each others'
struggles and local knowledge.

(2) the same housing activists talk about this on the mailing list
that someone creates, e.g. imc-ne-namerica-housing (NorthEast North
America), and the word gets around, just like for any other site.

(3) Someone in Key West notices (as an example only; i haven't checked
these particular two cases) that SF or SJ is not using RSS syndication
(and i'm not talking about the Mussolini RSS people, but if you read

http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/GlobalThemes

you'll know which RSS i'm talking about) and suggests that they do this.

(4) the Key West local IMC feature on housing gradually starts becoming
a regional resource on housing, but the activists are part of a local
network which is increasing contacts between more and more diverse
progressive groups and independent thinking individuals.

 
> >>homeless and economic justice issues. There is lots of good work being done 
> >>by local IMC participants on these issues, but most of the housing activists 
> >>remain unaware of what other groups and activists are doing. One exception 
> >>might be OCAP, which does a good job of promoting itself. And it is difficult 
> >>to find out what different cities are doing on these issues.
> >>
> >>There is already lots of content on this issue being posted to local IMCs. 
> >>There are IMCistas out there who are writing on these issues. I think a 
> >>subject-focused IMC like this would be a motivating project for many housing 
> >>activists and DIY journalists interested on these issues.
> 
> This proposal has nothing to do with the quality of work being done by local 
> IMCs. This proposal is about pulling that work together more, to benefit 
> activists and citizens and to allow for meta-collaboration on DIY journalism 
> by people working on these issues.

If you're only talking about meta-collaboration, then you're not 
talking about an IMC. 

Indymedia is bottom-up, not top-down. An IMC is the "bottom", the
grassroots. 

Coordination is a sensitive topic and requires a lot of communication
*work* to avoid hierarchy and all the other possible problems.

 
> > Calling it "an IMC" would just confuse people. 
> 
> Why? What does it matter if an IMC project is IMC-Housing or IMC-Milwaukee or 
> whatever?

Read the fine links above, please.

> >>As far as groups are concerned, I think that local housing coalitions, 
> >>homeless advocates, Homes not Jails, OCAP, KWRU, and other groups would be 
> >>interested.
> 
> > We would prefer that homeless people themselves can participate in
> > f2f meetings and participate in decision-making as much as homeful people.
> 
> Actually, a homeless person brought up this idea which I formally proposed.

So train that person in email + web and introduce him/her to his/her
local IMC so that he/she can propose a category/filter/feature on
the local IMC, which can be an experimental project to see if this is
feasible on a regional North America scale. But don't say global if
you only mean USA.
 
> > Otherwise we support coordinatorism - where a class of "representatives" 
> > is created, who are sincere and well-intentioned people, but who nevertheless
> > redirect the energy for change into reformist reforms, rather than 
> > non-reformist reforms. Homeless people who criticise the coordinators are
> > then looked at as ungrateful, irrational people, who refuse to acknowledge
> > the help of those who most want to help them.
> 
> Hey, this is about a project that would create a place for people concerned 
> with housing issues to share news and collaborate on projects that aren't 
> just local.

So read the above paragraph again, please. The people most concerned
require local IMCs with f2f meetings. You need to persuade people to
classify their articles as "housing" and to first of all create the 
categories. There is no way way will we have any sort of global
decision on which categories to create, nor on any "compulsory" 
categories that every local IMC must have.

So if you are serious about your project, then you're going to have
to do this communication work. Start humble. A mailing list dedicated
to the theme would be a good place to start.

> > previous email:
> > 
> >>housing need a centralized news source and resource for their work. Right now
> >>there has been an increase in anti-homeless policies in many American cities.
> 
> > Sounds like you're interested in a regional site, or a feature on a
> > regional site. The USA is only a small part of America, and America is
> > only one (or two, depending on your culture) of the continents. Here
> > is a big site on housing:
> > 
> > http://www.narmada.org
> > 
> > 50 million people thrown out of their houses since independence, simply
> > based on government estimates. Maybe you should get into contact.
> 
> Well, hey, why should we bother setting up new local IMCs? There are 
> alternative news outlets in each city. Let's ditch the NYC-IMC. People could 
> always go to the Village Voice.

Either this means:
(1) you are opposed to the idea of creating independent, radically 
transparent grassroots media 
or
(2) you are being sarcastic and are avoiding the question of what 
Indymedia is all about.


If (1), then there's no point your requesting to create an IMC.

If (2), then we're not having a constructive conversation.


Also:
(3) You have trivialised my suggestion that you contact the homeless
people's movement that was the first activist movement to throw
the World Bank out of a project. Homeless people in the world's
second largest democracy might learn a lot from activist techniques
of homeless people in the world's largest democracy.

Please be serious if you want to be taken seriously.

boud