[New-imc] sf.indymedia.org/indybay.org Split Problems

[Mike R]

This is an issue we really need to discuss.  Do we have a policy on
disputed ownership of collectives?  I remeber something happened way
back when with Vermont and with France, but were averted when the
older, inactive collectives gave up ownership to the newer active
ones.  Right now we have divorces, potential divorces, and conflicts
in Belgium, DC, and San Francisco, and to some extent in Philly, NYC,
& probably others I don't know about.  In the case of SF, the
divisions they have chosen make sense, one for the city & one for the
metropolitan area.  Nevertheless, they are both on the cities list &
we don't have a successful policy for removing errant IMCs, such as
the years that Western Massachusetts was up without open publishing.

With the rising conflict within the listed IMCs, & with likely more to
come, we need some sort of clear method for recognizing splits that
allow for the local autonomy.

It may make sense for both groups to submit documents to new-imc & go
through the approval process.  I am not sure if we are or are not the
forum to enforce locally decided agreements.  I would think that in
our approval process, making sure that the collectives are open and
that they have met with and have amicable relations with geographically
close IMCs.

I don't know if I've help people clarify their thoughts on this or
just muddled it more.

-Mike


Monday, January 05, 2004, 1:46:46 AM, lisa said:

ln> To clarify, the only reason we gave up
ln> sf.indymedia.org was because we were promised
ln> indybay.org by the other group. None of us wanted to
ln> give up sf.indymedia.org. It was a really really big
ln> concession. 

ln> All we want is the domain that we were promised in the
ln> agreement and a link to our site. Our group does need
ln> some help here. We don't know what to do.

ln> Also, the last message I send was a message from the
ln> entire SF Bay Area IMC (not just me.)

ln> Lisa



ln> --- Bht <criticalmasser at riseup.net> wrote:
>> Is Lisa here asking us to uphold SF IMC to the
>> agreement?  And is she
>> suggesting that we hold the passage through new-imc
>> process over their

ln> __________________________________
ln> Do you Yahoo!?
ln> Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
ln> http://search.yahoo.com/top2003
ln> _______________________________________________
ln> New-imc mailing list. Lista de correo New-imc
ln> New-imc at lists.indymedia.org
ln> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/new-imc



-- 
Mike
mailto:micro.zen at verizon.net