[Resolve] Re: [New-imc] rogue imc is officially on the cities list

[Arc]

On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 05:56:00PM -0400, Sarsnic at aol.com wrote:
> The simpler option is to invoke the one clear paramater of the
> blocking procedure: the deadline, which Arc missed entirely - his
> initial (and as it turned out premature and rescinded) announcement
> that Ithaca was blocking was ten days after the deadline, and his
> personal block came seventeen days after the deadline.  If Arc wants
> stricter rules, he can have them.  The rest of us should stop
> accomodating a seemingly strict and process related block which
> shouldn't, by the letter of the law, have even been considered.

Blocks were already made within the window for them to be made.  At that
point the deadlines are off as it's discussed how to move forward.  We
made our blocks only after it appeared clear that some people's goal on
how to deal with it was to marginise and ignore them.

After the additional blocks were made it was clear that it could not
move forward in imc-process so it was sent back to new-imc where the
issues could be addressed.

While it appears the concerns over outreach have been addressed, the
more serious concerns over their decidion making process has not.

IMC-Rogue remains in new-imc and will so until the concerns are
resolved, which cannot happen while personal attacks and power abuses
are making the issue so hostile most people won't speak on the issue.
-------------- 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/20030522/e3a61a68/attachment.pgp