[New-imc] network membership application for TN IMC

[evan]

I generally avoid 'me too' emails, but in this case i want to say  
something. I've been involved with many many imc's and helped start a  
fair number. With that experience, i strongly support what Boud says in  
this email. He says what i wanted to say more clearly and calmly than i  
could have.

Welcome to the new indymedia centers that are getting started.

in solidarity,
evan

On Monday, May 19, 2003, at 10:12  PM, boud wrote:

> hi shayne, new-imc, sandgropers,
>
> On Tue, 20 May 2003, Shayne O'Neill wrote:
>
>> The Rogue block, and general pouncing on and kicking the crap out of  
>> any
>> IMC that doesnt conform to the strictures of 'officialthink' consensus
>> method is having a frigging CHILLING effect on new IMCs if whats been
>> going on in our imc is anything to go by.
>>
>> It *really* sucks that the debate on the consensus model by us has had
>> this whole stupid cloud of "Hey, We know that the supermajority  
>> fallback
>> has always been pretty effective in perth circles, but sorry, we'll  
>> get
>> silenced if we do it.". Thats no consensus folks. Thats coercion.
>
> Relax! i know that docs (kropotkin.indymedia.org) has been inaccessible
> quite a lot, but when it's back up, if you carefully read through
> http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/NewImcHowTo
> you'll notice from:
> http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/MembershipCriteria
> or
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/new-imc/2001-May/000155.html
>
> that:
> (1) the Membership Criteria (and P of Unity) are only *draft* criteria
>
> (2)
>> g. Adopt a decision-making policy that is in alignment with consensus
>> principles which include open, transparent and egalitarian processes,
> So there is *not* any formal agreement that local IMCs *must* have a  
> full
> consensus decision-making procedure. "alignment with consensus  
> principles"
> is consistent with something which is partly a consensus process, i.e.
> aligned with it, but might be a little different.
>
> Just because arc talks authoritatively about full consensus being
> obligatory in Indymedia doesn't make it true.
>
> The *in*formal practice has generally been that as long as a local
> IMC has seriously *discussed* and thought through and made a local
> decision on a decision-making procedure, preferably after having
> seriously understood and discussed formal consensus processes, then
> the ultimate decision on decision-making is local. After all, even if
> the network *tried* to "coerce" a decision-making method on a local
> IMC - there's not much chance of it being effective. Local people will
> only do what they've understood and accepted and are comfortable
> with. If locals are forced to accept something they don't want to  
> accept,
> they'll just drop it after having been formally accepted into the  
> network.
>
> In some cases both the new-imc person and local group even forget to
> mention consensus at all... It's a function of who is willing to do
> the explanation and relationship building work.
>
>> Eitherway. We are using portlands consensus model. But I do declare
>> we've arived there with a gun to our head.
>
> i suspect that lack of experience on new-imc may have made it
> difficult for you to judge which comments to take more seriously. Of
> course we should listen to and try to understand all the comments, but
> maybe the more experienced people have failed to synthesise the  
> discussions
> enough for the newer people.
>
> People like arc have been around long enough to be aware of (1) and
> (2) above, so most of us have stopped repeating these. *If* we get
> global lists like imc-process running smoothly, and if US-based IMCs
> sort out their stuff on imc-us-process rather than hassling the rest
> of us, then we *might* come to a formal decision so that the
> membership criteria and principles of unity are no longer just drafts.
> But then again, it might not be seen as a priority, and might even be
> felt better as drafts than formal "decisions".
>
> As for "portland's" consensus model, i'll respond to that on imc-perth.
>
> solidarity
> boud
>
> _______________________________________________
> New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
> New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
-
| blog: anarchogeek.com                    pgp: anarchogeek.com/pgp.txt  
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
-
| Protest.net is an anti-this, anti-that website to divide, demoralize,  
|
| and bring down the very frabric of America. Proudly lead by pacifist,  
|
| godless, demented, berkenstock wearing, granola eating, peace-freak,   
|
| moronic, unamerican, green, muslim, communist, faggot, liberal,        
|
| serbian, arab, rag-head, anarchist, terrorist, scum, pigs and          
|
| traitors. We're underemployed scumbag welfare sucking parasitic        
|
| shelted uneducated intellecutals who are always explaining the root    
|
| causes of terrorism, blaming america first, and whining about          
|
| non-existant threats to civil liberties.                               
|
| GOD BLESS AMERICA!!! DEATH TO THOSE WHO STAND AGAINST US!!!            
|
|                      - All words from hate mail sent to protest.net    
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
-