[Seattle-editorial] Input, thru-put, and output. Wassup?

[Joseph Eisenschmidt]

Members all,

Yes you are!

This is an issue that must be decided by the few of us still 
actively editing the newswire. 

While this type of decision is owned by the Edtorial Collective, in 
the past I would have told every member at SEAIMC  about the 
pending issue, where Eds.head is, and let the larger Membership 
chime in. 

The Editorial Collective would have then been guided by the whole 
to make a decision for the whole, as this affects how we are seen, 
and how we interact with the readership, not just appearence, 
content, and functionality, Eds. gig.

The hiatus requires that we not engage in this wider, more 
participatory type of decision making. This is not a Seattle-Tech 
issue, they (She!) just want guidance on what we want the site to 
do, look like, and such. 

Without going into the fact that this is a serious breach in our 
core mission and values by removing ourselves from open, 
transparent interaction with each other, we must use the empowered 
state that we, the Seattle Independent Media Center Editorial 
Collective, find ourselves in. 

As the decision making body, I will say that the Editorial 
Collective would not make this level of change without notice, 
input, and thoughtful consideration of the general Membership. I 
could not in good conscience do that, and so folks are put on 
notice by the wider posting.

If anyone wants to have a say in the decisions of the Ed. 
Collective, like the marcher said, just show up. The next formal 
meeting of the Eds. is Sunday, march 21st, 2004, at 4116 University 
Way NE at 10:00 a.m.

We did post our minutes on the newswire, and will continue to err 
on the side of open over closed. Future minutes can be posted on 
the general list. The minutes of the last meetings, and all 
meetings, can found at:

http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/seattle-editorial/

I also take to heart the point of the member that we are not taking 
a vacation, we are taking a hiatus. Those of us still working to 
keep the lights on are due for some commendation, and not 
condemnation. 

Those Members who showed up at the last General Meeting and were 
not able to help in the year before our hiatus, and who do not help 
us in our time of need, do not earn respect nor do they earn 
disrespect. They earn what they earn.

There are Members who are 'doin what they can', such as those who 
helped tear down the od fixtures. There are Members who are working 
against our purposes, as happened during the aborted move. There
are no small members, just small contributions that add up to the 
Whole.

The question is: What are we, as a whole, doing to heal? If I tell 
you what I did, and you tell me what you did, we've just talked 
about ourselves. WE did nothing, except pat each other on the back 
after the fact. Gppd, but not a group healing process.

In the end, however, we are an organization that relies on 
volunteers to do the work. We have a system that is vague about 
what constitutes membership, and what responsibilities and 
authorities that are granted-or perhaps the term should be 
liberties taken. After all, they don't give liberty away, one must 
pluck it and cultivate it, and guard it.

And most importantly, share it. 

No they don't give it away, but like money, it is only pure when it 
flows, and always stagnent when it sits in pools.

Thanks for the insightful comments my friends.

In Solidarity, 

Joseph Eisenschmidt