[Seattletech] Re: [Seattle-editorial] RE: [IMC-Seattle] David vsGoliath, or IMC News vs Corporations

Sat May 22 12:27:53 PDT 2004

Hi Bill --

My point is that the collectives have to reconstitute -- or there is no 
Seattle IndyMedia. IMHO, this is the viable structure that we need to 
build **asap**.  The collectives may or may not include the same 
people.  I wouldn't be surprised if they don't. The life cycle of an 
activist is relatively short -- the path from enthusiasm to burn out 
can be weeks or months.  That is why a collective has to become strong 
enough to not depend on any one person or group of people.

I wasn't a member during the start of the Seattle IMC, but I've been a 
list member  since February 2003, and I became an active editorial 
worker during (or should I say despite) the "rest" period.  At this 
point, the Seattle IndyMedia is technically  "awake", but other than 
the website, there is no structure set up for anyone (newbies or 
oldtimers) to participate.

We have a lot of things to work out before the "big" meeting, but I 
think that the first step is to determine what structure (if any) that 
needs to be established prior to reforming the collectives.  If the 
answer is "none" -- then let's give the shout out that people can begin 
working again.

-- Laury

On May 21, 2004, at 10:18 AM, bill aal wrote:

> Hi Laury,
>    Thanks for your thoughtful reply to my note.  I agree in principle
> with much of what you say, especially about coming back slowly, but I
> don't think there are collectives to reconstitute.  That is the reason
> why things had to go to sleep for a while. There was a lack of people
> and political will to do the work that needed to be done.  In the
> absence of viable structures and effective work, and a shared and
> coherent vision of what could be built, there wasn't enough support for
> the IMC to continue as it was.
>
> We had to push the sleep button.  But now we need to reload our
> operating system (maybe moving to a whole new one???).  Otherwise when
> the IMC is turned back on, all the same stuff will happen or more
> precisely won't happen, and we will be back to square one.  There are a
> lot of potential approaches to starting up, I would love to hear other
> ideas shared on this list.
>
> We If we don't start with first principles of what an Indymedia Center
> is about in Seattle, we will not be able to gather more folks who want
> to work. The form should follow the function.  So I think a few
> exploratory meetings would be useful, make some immediate decisions
> about finances and logistics and decisions that the editorial tech or
> emergency collective suggests and move forward with creating a coherent
> and inclusive vision of Seattle IMC.  There is no rush, since the 
> empire
> will be here for a long time.
>
> The NWS Forum is an opportunity, not a burning crisis.  Many of us will
> be participating in different ways and if indy is in a place to fully
> participate with Portland and Vancouver perhaps, that would be a great
> thing.
>
> In Solidarity,
>  Bill
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: seattletech-bounces at lists.indymedia.org
> [mailto:seattletech-bounces at lists.indymedia.org] On Behalf Of Laury
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 1:46 AM
> To: bill aal
> Cc: 'ListEditorial'; 'ListSeaTech'; 'ListSeattle'
> Subject: [Seattletech] Re: [Seattle-editorial] RE: [IMC-Seattle] David
> vsGoliath, or IMC News vs Corporations
>
> First, rather than ramping up, let's wake up.  IMHO, it would be a
> mistake to have an open meeting without reconstituting the collectives.
>    Critical SEAIMC decisions should be made by active members of the
> collectives -- not the local arm chair activists . . . or, worse, our
> troll brigade.  Likewise, we need to ascertain whether we have the
> volunteers to do the work -- and raise money.  Without a volunteer
> base, there is no need for a Media Center.
>
> Here is my proposal:
>
> Prior to the meeting, let's make an announcement on the website that we
> are coming out of hiatus and make a shout out for volunteers  (to work
> on the website, to fundraise, to work on media events such as the NW
> Social Forum, to work on community outreach, etc.).  Each collective
> should establish weekly planning/work meetings open to any anyone
> willing to make a minimum 3 month commitment to that collective.  Since
> money is an issue, a fundraising collective should plan short term "out
> of debt" fundraising action plan and a more long term fundraising
> strategy.   If there are only enough volunteers to run a bake sale . .
> . so be it.
>
> During this wake up period, no new expenses should be paid by Seattle
> Indymedia.  All wake-up activity should be self-sustaining.
>
> Once the collectives have had an opportunity to ramp up again (a month?
>   two months? three months?), then **and only then ** should we have 
> the
>
> full meeting.  This should be an all-day event.  Attendees should be
> limited to currently active members of the collective.  Representatives
> of each of the collectives would provide a forward-looking work plan,
> including a clear mission statement as well as information about their
> operating expenses for the next 12 months.  This information should
> minimally include whether the collective needs funding or if they will
> be a self-sustaining and/or fundraising collective.  Each proposal
> should be voted upon by all the attendees.
>
> During the meeting, a 12-month action plan should be approved to pay
> the entire SEAIMC debt off and create a surplus fund.  This plan should
> include the operating costs of the collectives and the process for
> paying these expenses.  Additionally, there should be a clear breakdown
> of how SEAIMC  fundraising money will be spent (e.g., 40% debt, 40%
> current expenses, 20% surplus) and whether the collectives are
> permitted to raise their own funds or not.  (If they are, the plan
> should contain the percentage that goes to the Seattle IndyMedia
> central fund.)  This plan must also define who has the power to sign
> checks and provide a transparent accounting process.
>
> At the end of the meeting, each collective should be empowered to work
> autonomously on the high level plan passed in the full meeting.  If
> there are any unforeseen financial expenses or the scope of their work
> changes, each collective has the option of petitioning for additional
> funding.
>
> -- Laury Kenton
>
> On May 20, 2004, at 1:30 PM, bill aal wrote:
>
>> Actually,
>>  The northwest social forum is a potential project that indymedia
> could
>> be involved in a ,major way in October.  It is vision building not
>> opposition.
>> If people are interested to collaborate on creating a media space (
>> with
>> other like minded people, this could be an opportunity.... Or it could
>> be simply a place to have a large scale conversation about political
>> media vs the empire, etc....  I know others in Seattle are wanting to
>> have that conversation.  Could it be a rallying pint for indy?
>> www.nwsocialforum.org  is a touch stone.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: imc-seattle-bounces at lists.indymedia.org
>> [mailto:imc-seattle-bounces at lists.indymedia.org] On Behalf Of Joseph
>> Eisenschmidt
>> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 10:01 AM
>> To: ListSeattle
>> Cc: ListSeaTech; ListEditorial
>> Subject: [IMC-Seattle] David vs Goliath, or IMC News vs Corporations
>>
>> Friends,
>>
>> Staying Strong means staying small.
>>
>> Staying small is really the only option, and since we are small at
>> this point, with a tiny but functional Ed. WG, and a tech person
>> still maintaining the site, we need to find out what is working for
>> the folks doing the day to day work, and see if it's ok just to
>> continue doing that.
>>
>> We experienced, creative folks can come up with more great ideas
>> than the field units will be able to use. I think you'll agree that
>> this is part of our long-term institutional problem. Striking the
>> balance between support and direction, needed imagineering and
>> actual reality based organizational capability.
>>
>> Frankly, we have nothing to ramp up for; no G-8 in Seattle in 2005,
>> etc. And Seattle has a wealth of 'news and ideas' in it's
>> alternative press at this time, from KBCS to Colors mag.
>>
>> My concerns about the top heavy nature of imagineering must be
>> tempered with the need to develop formal as well as informal ways
>> for the community to interact with - and help give direction to-the
>> IMC. An advisory board or something might help.
>>
>> We ARE just a website now, and will remain so for as far as I can
>> see at this point. Randy's video work is a good source of raw
>> material, and I think the way he plugs into the SEAIMC, like an
>> autonomous module doing great supporting work, is the model we
>> should seek to encourage and foster.
>>
>> UC-IMC is run this way, with WG's doing their own thing, and only
>> reporting back occasionally. The decision-making is forced down to
>> the WG level, and GM's are twice yearly. All meetings are open, so
>> anyone who wants a say just plugs in where they feel most useful.
>>
>> After all is said and done, I can see there are still great and good
>> feelings towards the SEAIMC. I was talking to Jim G., the local
>> permit-getter who is the official permit holder for the DNC in
>> Boston, and he said folks in Boston were concerned with our
>> struggles and thought highly of us. That feels warm and fuzzy.
>>
>> At Ed., we need bodies. Not many, but just a very few good workers
>> streaming in over time. Same with Randy's video collective. S.B.
>> can't train newbies easily do to the technical nature of software
>> work, and her schedule and stuff. Recruiting just the right tech
>> person or three is something we need to work on.
>>
>> Add in fundraising for bandwidth and a piece of media recording
>> equipment or two and an occasional upgrade, and were still tiny.
>> Like a diamond or a little baby, we're tiny and therefore hold much
>> promise and potential.
>>
>> In Solidarity,
>> and keeping it simple and therefore not stupid,
>>
>> Joseph
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> imc-seattle mailing list
>> imc-seattle at lists.indymedia.org
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-seattle
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Seattle-editorial mailing list
>> Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
>> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Seattletech mailing list
> Seattletech at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattletech
>
> _______________________________________________
> Seattle-editorial mailing list
> Seattle-editorial at lists.indymedia.org
> http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/seattle-editorial
>