[New-imc] PROPOSAL to andy & chuck to apologise for personal attacks

[boud]

<cross-post new-imc,
mediacollective at students.sou.edu, chuck at mutualaid.org>


############################################################
PROPOSAL to andy and chuck

Could you please *both* apologise to each other, onlist, for your
personal attacks on the new-imc mailing list, *without* at the same
time introducing any new personal attacks?

You might wish to cc: to imc-process.

############################################################


hi everyone,

In my experience of new-imc, this is the first time we have had
personal attacks on the list. There have been tensions, conflicts,
and references to criticisms which were felt to be personal attacks
on other lists, but no direct personal attacks, and people have
been serious about listening to one another and trying to 
understand one another.

So the first step is to ask the two people to apologise, it seems
to me.
 
andy wrote:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2003-January/004407.html

>  Why does Chuck0 insist on defying this consensus, by bringing yet
> another such "proposal"? He also adamantly
...

> And where does he get off, calling me a "disrupter", etc., for
> criticizing his incorrect analysis and practice?  In fact, such
> adhominem dismissal, especially in defense of an unprincipled
> position, which he cannot defend in fact or documentation, is the
> truly disruptive practice.
...

> But persistence in trying to hijack, splinter and divert IMC
> resources should be grounds for reconsideration of one's sincerety
> of committment to IMC Principles of Unity.

andy, many parts (unquoted) of your above email are fair comment, IMHO.

However, the parts i have quoted are, IMHO, personal attacks on chuck,
which have no place on the new-imc working group mailing list. 

Please apologise and cease making personal attacks.


chuck0 wrote:
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2003-January/004408.html

chuck, you succeeded in raising discussion on an important issue on
the mailing lists, but you seem to have been a little confused and so
far you don't seem to have taken up any of the positive suggestions.
Now you have clearly got very upset with andy.

i can understand that you were upset at the initial negative
reactions, but these were not made lightly. We are all seriously
committed activists here, and as you see many people think the general
idea may be a good one, even though only one person so far (salim) has
stated any commitment to *working* on the project. 

Apart from salim, the support that some people have given so far is
"yes, if other people do it, that would be great, in some form, though
not within the scope of the new-imc working group". There is nothing
wrong with this, as long as noone is confused between approval in 
principle and doing something in practice.

Now, seeing your extremely strong personal attack on andy, i think that
before you even ask for a mailing list, you will need to find a 
facilitator capable of handling your own emotive outbursts! Within
a limited cultural context, those sort of personal attacks might be
tolerated, and interpreted as friendly play, and given what you've
said so far, you should be clear that the list is mainly for 
North American housing issues, rather than global housing issues.

Or you could simply use the existing "syndication" list.

But *first* of all, a big apololgy to andy is in order. Your
upset at the difficulties starting a different sort of IMC project
is no justification for personal attacks.

boud