[New-imc] Lets Welcome Rogue to the Network

[Arc]

On Tue, May 20, 2003 at 11:31:38AM -0700, christine detwiler wrote:
> After hearing it confirmed by Boud and agreeded to by Evan 
> that:
> (1) the Membership Criteria (and P of Unity) are only *draft* criteria
> and:
> Just because arc talks authoritatively about full consensus being
> obligatory in Indymedia doesn't make it true. (New-imc,May 19)
> I say lets welcome Rogue to the network.

I highly disagree with the Membership Criteria and Principals of Unity
being only "drafts".  They were proposed over a year ago, they've been
used as organizational documents on the network and it's been a
requirement since I've been involved with Indymedia that applicant IMCs
discuss and respond to these documents.

Nor has there have been no suggestions to major changes in these
documents in several months.

If these documents are not valid then there is no criteria for new-imc's
to enter the network.  No requirement that there even be a "collective",
and since there seems to be a strong pressure by some of the new-imc
volunteers that individual blocks should be ignored I propose the
following choice must be made (of course there's several alternatives to
each) in order for this group to move forward in a fair and democratic
fashion:

1) All new IMC applicants immediatly go to imc-process for a three week
review and discussion period, during which time only IMCs can block by
"true consensus" - any other form of decidion making gives IMCs with
majority-fallbacks more weight in the decidion making process.
New-IMC's which are blocked by atleast one whole IMC must be accepted
into the network at the end of their three-week wait period, they are
not required to do anything since we have no formal process established.

2) The NIMC Membership Criteria and Principals of Unity are recognised
as being consensed on through practice (no formal process is needed) and
the New-IMC process we've used for the past year continue.  IMCs are
required to fufill the Membership Criteria to join the network, which in
part, includes adhering to the principals of unity.

Simply put, continuing to do #2 (as we always have) while switching to
#1 when the members of the group "feel like it" is unfair to both the
network and other new-imc applicants who have to struggle through the
difficult (but I believe nessesary) process we've setup.

Just because some of the members of IMC-Rogue are friends with some of
the global techs doesn't mean they get to be treated any differently.
We have our policies, wether or not they were formally consensed on they
either must be accepted as being our policy or we have no policy left in
place.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/new-imc/attachments/20030520/094fd1c9/attachment.pgp