Minutes of Indymedia Meeting (16th Sep 2006)
dublin |
indymedia ireland |
news report
Monday September 18, 2006 20:28
by Anthony - Indymedia Ireland Editorial Group
Minutes of the first proper Indymedia meeting to take place since May 2005. This meeting formed the first (brain-storming) part of a proposal on the imc-ireland mailing list by a list subscriber to "have an organizing conference in September to deal with important outstanding issues surrounding the running of indymedia.".
The meeting began with each participant introducing themselves and stating their involvement in Indymedia. It was then pointed out by the chair that there was too much on the agenda for a two-hour meeting so a discussion began as to what the priorities for the meeting should be.
12:30 Wider Collective:
The current theoretical structure was outlined but it's not currently working as it was originally envisioned. Problems with the current structure were then identified and barriers to getting involved were noted on the flip chart:
- Unclear decision making process
- Not enough links between online community and real life community
- Feeling that you have to be an editor to be involved
- Not clear how to link editorial group to wider collective + individual groups to wider collective (editorial group ended up being the only aspect of Indymedia)
- Not enough real world meetings / Reliance on virtual meeting space
- Structures that exist and role of editors not clear to general public
After the problems had been identified, participants were asked to brainstorm with suggestions to solve the problems as outlined above. To ensure that the meeting remained a productive one, participants were asked not to criticise other suggestions but to focus on presenting their own. They were asked to begin their sentence with “One thing that we can do is ...”:
- establish who has a vote in the wider collective - allowing proxy votes
- put together an organising list for video and film-makers
- develop an online resource for women
- create extra categories to encourage different groups to use the site
- print a small document to publicise the site to outreach to other groups
- meet those people in the real world
- create a separate out-reach mailing list
- create a new list for abuse reports
- make a clear decision that the current Indymedia collective is only web-site Indymedia
- constitute this group meeting here as the Dublin Indymedia collective who makes decisions by consensus
13:00 Gender
For this section the participants of the meeting broke up into three groups each dealing with a question relating to the issues of gender and sexism:
1) What can be done to increase women's participation?
(As reported and minuted by James)
- There are different types of participation, producing articles and cleaning the newswire work.
- There should be positive discrimination for women aimed at involving more in both aspects. There is a perception that imc.ie is a closed shop and even if that isn't true, positive steps should be taken to ensure that it isn't.
- It was suggested this could involve doing 3 or 4 workshops a year aimed at women who might be interested in using the site, for example members of community campaigns, feminist groups. These workshops would be aimed at encouraging women who aren't familiar with Indymedia to use it as a place to publish stories etc
- Conduct 3 or 4 workshops per year for female users or female members of groups who use Indymedia. These workshops would be focussed on detailing how the site is administered: what the editors, techies, etc do, how to help out with that. How to become an editor and to offer practical assistance to women interested in this aspect of Indymedia.
- More real world meetings would serve to put faces on names, and make Indymedia a more friendly environment as the lists can be too impersonal.
- To take measures to facilitate the attendance of people who have kids at Indymedia meetings.
- To have explicit list guidelines in order to ensure appropriate behaviour on the lists. Apart from explicit sexist or racist mails being prohibited, people should be sensitive to minorities on the lists. So, remarks which may be intended to be funny, can easily be interpreted as being smartarsey and thus contribute to an environment where women feel less than welcome. Everybody should be able to participate in discussions without fear of abuse, intimidation or snide remarks.
- To reconsider the system whereby one editor can block anybody from becoming an editor. This could be abused in a rogue fashion, to prevent appropriate people from becoming editors on the grounds of sex, race, affiliation etc.
2) What is sexism and how is it experienced?
(As reported and minuted by R)
Sexism is when people are treated differently because of their sex/gender
In an indymedia context we felt that the perception of sexism is enough to convince people of a real sexism on behalf of the indymedia collective even when this is not the case. This perception is encountered in threads where people make agresssive accusations of sexism. This may turn some women away from becoming more involved as contributors or editors.
One person felt that indymedia.ie needs to be more proactive in dealing with the perception of sexism, by directly responding to accusations and encouraging women to get involved.
We felt that while the gender balance of the indymedia collective is obviously a problem, it is symptomatic of an activist community in which men are generally in the majority. Regular contributors to indymedia are predominantly male.
Perhaps women are deterred from becoming more involved in indymedia due to the assumption of gender roles, i.e. by assuming they wouldn't be abe to do any of the technical stuff necessary.
We were also concerned with tokenism, i.e. putting more women onto the editorial collective merely because they were women, without addressing the wider cultural and institutional problems.
Someone also remarked about the length of the procedure necessary for people to become editors, perhaps this needs to be made more transparent.
3) What Are The Barriers To Women In Indymedia?
(As reported and minuted by Ray)
- Technical Skills
- Time
- Media Arts - Radio, TV, Web, can be technical in nature
- Lack of Awareness
- Activism - Women more active in creative arts, constructive real-world activities
- Isolation / Minority - feeling of being in a minority
- Not Real World Enough
- Problem of Society - Gender Bias in society
- Prioritisation of Women
- What is Required to be an Editor?
- Lack of Active Recruitment
- Existence of Blocks in Society - Stopping people joining a 'club'
- Lack of Gender Issues Covered
- Lack of Separate Section for Women
- Fear of Speaking Out
13:40 Email List
The last item on the agenda was the running of the email lists. As we were short of time, we went directly to suggestions for improving the working of the email lists. The following problems and suggestions came up.
- Written Code of Conduct – Personalised comments should be proscribed
- Good Netiquette should be adhered to
- Introduce moderators who are not editors – recall and rotation of such
- Use a web-based forum instead of email list
- Have a list secretary – to keep track of proposals & decisions
- Clear and Separate Procedure for Complaints
- Sensitivity should to women are in the minority
- Separate Abuse Reports into Another List – Limit the Amount of such reports that can be made by any one individual
- Positive Expression of Safe Space Guidelines
- Lack of Understanding of Threading
- Suggestion that people think through proposals clearly
- Introduce user-friendly procedures
- Specialist Lists for different activities
- A volunteer should be designated to answer the
- Reasons given in editorial notifications should not be abusive
- Set up a separate list to discuss process
Finally, it was agreed that all proposals based on this brain-storming session would be discussed on the imc-ireland list. All formal proposals should be submitted to the imc-ireland list for consideration at the next meeting.
James volunteered to collate the agenda for the next meeting and if collating similar proposals would get the permission of the original proposers beforehand.
It was agreed that anyone making a proposal will have to physically present to present their proposal at the next meeting. If they are unable to attend themselves, they will have to organise a proxy to attend on their behalf.
It was then suggested that editors should discuss in the mean-time whether consensus or voting would be used for decision-making at the next meeting. Editors would have to agree on the standing orders before the meeting takes place regarding decisions running the site.
It was suggested that the Dublin collective should meet once a month as a separate entity.
It was agreed that minutes of this meeting will be posted to the Indymedia newswire. As the subject of the article includes how the site is run or could be run, commenting on editorial policy will be allowed but all other editorial guidelines will be enforced rather than having a repeat of the previous article on Indymedia where a lot of abuse was tolerated. It was also agreed that proposals for the next meeting could be discussed on the newswire report of this meeting.
It was agreed that the next real world meeting would take place on 7th October 2006.
make this your indymedia front page
printable version
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (182 of 182)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182apologies for lateness.
What is sexism and how is it experienced?
Sexism is when people are treated differently because of their sex/gender
In an indymedia context we felt that the perception of sexism is enough to convince people of a real sexism on behalf of the indymedia collective even when this is not the case. This perception is encountered in threads where people make agresssive accusations of sexism. This may turn some women away from becoming more involved as contributors or editors.
One person felt that indymedia.ie needs to be more proactive in dealing with the perception of sexism, by directly responding to accusations and encouraging women to get involved.
We felt that while the gender balance of the indymedia collective is obviously a problem, it is symptomatic of an activist community in which men are generally in the majority. Regular contributors to indymedia are predominantly male.
Perhaps women are deterred from becoming more involved in indymedia due to the assumption of gender roles, i.e. by assuming they wouldn't be abe to do any of the technical stuff necessary.
We were also concerned with tokenism, i.e. putting more women onto the editorial collective merely because they were women, without addressing the wider cultural and institutional problems.
Someone also remarked about the length of the procedure necessary for people to become editors, perhaps this needs to be made more transparent.
You seem to be denying the problem:
"In an indymedia context we felt that the perception of sexism is enough to convince people of a real sexism on behalf of the indymedia collective even when this is not the case. This perception is encountered in threads where people make agresssive accusations of sexism."
Come on now- there's only a problem with sexism on Indymedia because people comlain about it? As a woman user of Indymedia, this is unacceptable. Are you saying that when we point sexism out, we're being cranks, and we should just shut up, because WE are creating the problem?
You are purely giving lip service to the issue- are you trying to tell us you are taking the issue seriously when you state that "the perception of sexism is enough to convince people of a real sexism on behalf of the indymedia collective even when this is not the case"? This IS the case. It is hugely insulting that you claim to be concerned about this issue, and then just brush off sexism in the same sentence. I am disappointed, but unfortunately not surprised.
Note: I don't know who 'R.' or 'Woman' is - but it would be helpful if people used their own well recognised pseudonyms in this discussion. And please, no more sock puppetry.
Many good ideas here - thanks goes out to Anthony and James for the work put into this.
I wasn't there, so my responses are based on what I am reading, not on how things were like at the meeting itself.
———
I wanted to comment about only a few of the points above off the top of my head and then go to others later on....
• develop an online resource for women
• It was suggested this could involve doing 3 or 4 workshops a year aimed at women who might be interested in using the site
• To take measures to facilitate the attendance of people who have kids at Indymedia meetings.
All of these are great ideas and I support them. But there is nothing about these particular proposals that require approval from editors. If people want to create an online guide of women's resources, I am sure that the current editors would be supportive. Workshops? Again, I am sure you could find a friendly editor (or someone else - doesn't have to be an editor) who will do this. And child care, again I am sure the editors are supportive of this too. But I don't think one would want a bunch of guys dictating who would be providing childcare, right?
• Conduct 3 or 4 workshops per year for female users or female members of groups who use Indymedia.
Again, no problem. If there is a demonstrated demand I am sure editors and others can provide this.
I think it is very important to think beyond 'The Editors' in the proposals i highlighted above. There is absolutely nothing stopping these things from happening now (or many many months ago). It is just a matter of energy, time and organisation to find the people and space to do these things - and then, if needed, the editors can vote on it.
• create a separate out-reach mailing list
Few know about it and it is not used, but there has been a mailing list for this for sometime....
imc-ireland-promo
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-ireland-promo/
• To have explicit list guidelines in order to ensure appropriate behaviour on the lists.
I agree with this one, as well. Especially in regards to people who make demands from members of the mailing lists via the contact form [ http://indymedia.ie/contact_us ] when they know they could do the prerequisite homework before making such requests. Such repeated behaviour is tiresome, antagonistic and should no longer be tolerated.
Indymedia is an all-volunteer organisation - this means it is also DIY. If someone wants something done, then go out and do it. If it requires approval with the editorial team - in terms of features or off-line 'indymedia branded' events, then the editors can talk this stuff through.
Also, yes there should be women editors and I (as one editor) would support and have always supported 'positive discrimination' that promotes qualified women. I know many of these qualified women, but they will not become editors unless they themselves step forward and request to become editors.
I hope they do.
I also believe that anyone (male or female) that wishes to be an editor must be subscribed to and an active participant in the 'imc-ireland-editorial' mailing list for a minimum of about one month first. [ http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-ireland...orial ]
I'll write up more comments later regarding these notes.
What is the exact nature of the sexism of which you complain?
Woman I am sure will answer for herself but I would like to give my opinion.
The sexism is demonstrated by the fact that there are 13 male editors and 0 female editors. This suggests Institutional Sexism. If a Trade Union Executive Committee, Credit Union Board or Community Group Council had no female members it would be seen as a scandal. The fact that the Indymedia.ie Editorial Collective is entirely male is also a scandal.
Very happy to see that there is a will to rethink about structure failings and of facing possible sexism in indymedia ie:
thanks for this post and the work is being done
Very sorry not to be there and personally contribute to all this process
sorry if something is not completelly understandable (i try my best)
-on decision making: consensus and blocking: now that docs works again it would be helpfull check that: https://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/DecisionMakingGuide
-on women and sexism:
*there has been people complaining about indymedia ie sexism for a long time. It is necessary to face it cause nobody wants that. I think it is a good start and hope we get it. Let's make indymedia ie a friendlier and safer space for women.
*It can help to have wellcome in general(women, other cultures people...)someone responsible of wellcoming and doing workshops to anyone willing to be editor(for example after 3 or 4 requests do a workshop (we are all busy and volunters)).
*It can help taking complains seriously and stablish a general procedure for possible cases. If someone in indymedia is accused for being racist how do you deal with this? how do you try to know if it is true? what do you do if it is true? the same sexual violence, fascism and this....
*it can help constructive criticism instead of destructing one.
-i have to say that i am another local indymedia editor (bcn) and i have been wellcomed to the indy ie list(there was a misunderstanding about this) so i have not been refused or removed from the list.
A County Councillor who was visiting a large mental hospital was impressed by the smallness of the staff responsible for the control of nearly a thousand inmates. Why, he wondered, were there not more frequent disorders? "Tell me," he said to the official who was showing him around, "how is it that the inmates do not band together and overpower your small staff?" The official answered in a flash: "Neurotics never co-operate." Dr Eustace Chesser, Love without fear, 1941.
Drop the ad-hominem and ad-feminem attacks and put the procedures in place to ensure that accusations of sexism are handled transparently to the satisfaction of a reasonable observer. It will cost nothing and will benefit both accuser and accused, whichever is correct.
put the procedures in place
Without a trace of ad hominem ... what are those procedures? Specifics please.
Good report ,but could somebody please explain what this means:
"make a clear decision that the current Indymedia collective is only web-site Indymedia"
Is there any other indymedia ?
The meeting appears to have been very constructive. Just a few points.
Thanks for the minutes.
I agree with the point that 'woman' is making above. It isnt just a perception of sexism - there is sexism.
Secondly, there is no necessity for any great fear of tokenism. Was there a worry about tokenism when appointing men? Is there more to be afraid of where women are concerned? The women who have supported and contributed to this site are all as capable and constructive as the men who control it.
The workshops will be very welcome. Will they all be held in Dublin?
Any meetings planned outside of Dublin?
If this was a meeting with a decent facilatator I'm sure they would have repeatedly have asked you to let other people speak at this stage. Taking the cue from Redjade, I suggest you make a proposal if you have anything more to contribute to this discussion.
Again taking a cue again from Redjade, are you willing to put some work into organising a meeting in Cork? You live there and contribute from there, I'm sure if you went about organising a workshop some people from Dublin could (provided it fits in with their life commitments) give you some help with it.
"If this was a meeting with a decent facilatator I'm sure they would have repeatedly have asked you to let other people speak at this stage. Taking the cue from Redjade, I suggest you make a proposal if you have anything more to contribute to this discussion. "
What a charming welcoming comment from yet another editor. It really makes the plebs feel welcome. How am I preventing anyone else from commenting? I dont have the power to hide comments.
I have already suggested that you approach SIPTU or ICTU to get a mediator
1) for the second meeting;
2) to help the Indymedia Collective to overcome its Institutional Sexism.
That is a proposal.
The report backs from the two other sub-groups as reported on by R and Ray have now been received and I've added them into the original minutes above. I'd like to take this opportunity to again thank Aileen for her excellent job in chairing the meeting. Well done.
On the agreed issue of equality of access on the issue of gender within
IMC Ireland, I would suggest that women and men who have an interest in
discussing positive proposals for the meeting in October would meet and discuss the formulation of proposals to be sent in Writing to the lists. These are the ones that will be
accepted by the colective. There are lists available through groups like Resist ca and rise
up that would provide facilities for such a discussion, for those not in the Dublin Collective
or outer group that met on Saturday.
"These are the ones that will be
accepted by the colective."
How can you know what will be accepted by anyone Chris? I'm completely confused as to how I can contribute to any of this apart from either posting to this thread, posting to the editors list (which is what it says above). Are you saying there is some other process?
I have offered to organise a meeting in Cork. I posted a proposal and reminders for that proposal - see January - March editorial archives - and ever more wistful posts after that on this subject! I offered to get a venue, computers and whatever might be needed. I offered to put leaflets out and about in Cork and to mail/contact anyone you already know of in this area. I asked for the presence of two editors so that there would be experienced voices at the meeting. I suggested in January that the meeting be arranged for March so as to give any willing Dublin editors a chance to plan time for the visit. I can only speak as a contributor and may not be able to answer the sorts of questions newcomers may have - especially on visual stuff.
The replies I have had to the best of my recollection are:
1. Chekov - who said he thought it was a good idea and would try to make time to come down but I had no response to my reminders from him since then
2. Kev - who thought that he might be able to help out but was busy at the time and recommended I do it alone.
I dont mind doing it alone but have reservations about 'being' Indymedia in the circumstances. My intention was to help promote both contributions and readers.
Maybe I should re-propose since the original seems to have been forgotten?
Chris's suggestion of an online meeting forum would be really helpful but there is a need for face to face meetings with folk out in the shires too. What I'd hoped to do in Cork was to make it a sort of open day so people could come and ask about Indymedia, look at how it works and get tech advice if needed. We could then organise our own meetings in Cork among any people who express an interest in volunteering/contributing after taht. It's just helping to get it off the ground that Im suggesting, really.
I am saying that the meeting was constructive, that we were advised that this list would
be useful for agenda formation, but that only written proposals to the editorial list would
be accepted for the agenda on gender at the October meeting, thus Logically
those with an interest in pre-discussing the issue would converse and agree
some definite proposals. Some people are not on the editorail list(including me) and some
are unable to fully discuss because of distance issues, thus a facility for formulating
proposals to the collective would be a way of having discussions in the formulation
of proposals. This could be done quite easily and researched accounts on how other groups
such as NWCI/political parties would aid the issue enormously. It is a suggestion.
Whilst here and the ed list might suffice, it would also be nice to bring in people from afar
and concentrate wholly on the issue of gender. It can be quite easy for things to get cluttered
and dispersed on an open list, such as this, wherein I had to repeat the proposals
for both a minutes taker to be available and a mediator. T'is a discussion, focussing on prioritisation. however if people want to do it singly without collaborating that is cool too.
I'm not sure what Chris is talking about regarding lists - existing ones or new ones to be created? If the latter, then offer some links please. If the former, is there some reason they should be on riseup.net or resist.ca and not lists.indymedia.org?
But if you want your issues to be ignored, the best way to do that is to start new or other mailing lists.
I look forward to reading clearly written proposals on the indy lists
You are still not on the editorial mailing list MY GOD! why why why, go apply and you can be on it in ten minutes. !!!!!!!!!! What you do on that list is another question but you are creating non- difficulties for yourself and continuing to confuse personality clashes for sexism.
A discussion forum on gender to formulate proposals to the editorial list,
for these reasons:
1. Access.
2.Agreed approach.
3.Research on gender inclusivity.
why?
Things can get dispersed on the openwire list.
Some people are not on that list and may want their views included.
Thus, as stated at the meeting written proposals on gender, alone, will be accepted
at the October meeting. Therefore a facility for open discussion that would feed into the
agenda formation proposals that is inclusive.
I will give an example, three or four separate groups of people could come up with a similar idea, that may be worded differently, thus taking valuable time from discussion on
items on the agenda. If groups, such as gay rights, anti-patriarchy or feminist
discuss with each other and agree to forming a specific point it reduces the ability
of points from getting lost in a voluminous open list and focusses the issues.
It was just a suggestion- I am sure a clunky one, but these things can be refined by inclusive debate.
"this list would
be useful for agenda formation,"
Do you mean this current thread that we're posting on right now or are you talking about some list I should be on? Is there some way of accessing this thread as a list?
"Logically
those with an interest in pre-discussing the issue would converse and agree
some definite proposals."
Agree
" Some people are not on the editorail list(including me)"
Are we not allowed on it?
" and some
are unable to fully discuss because of distance issues,"
I'm in Donegal. I don't see what you're getting at about the distance. We're discussing here aren't we? Or do I have to attend a physical meeting?
"accounts on how other groups
such as NWCI/political parties would aid the issue enormously."
What are the NWCI?
http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-ireland...orial
Of course you are allowed on it.
are the National Women's Council Of Ireland.
These lists get habitually long, and as I said repitition of points can occur
thus people can find themselves making exactly the same point. The issue of
gender is therefore obfuscated by other discussions , given that it is something
that should be prioritised in, it appears many walks of life I was simply suggesting that
another forum for discussion on gender could provide a focus point for formulating a
proposal or set of proposals on inclusivity, categories and management of issues
such as trolling on feminist issues.
we would often organise fora and discussions to feed into proposals
for a convention or meeting. it creates a familiarity between groups and a relaxed open space
to discuss important issues of gender. such sites exisit already within IMC, the links
are on the other thread-unfortunately with the massive load of discussion , you have to
trawl to find em.
I thought "procedures" and typed "the procedures" as if there were some proposed. No harm - I can locate specific operational procedures for handling disputes - want some? Every proactive organisation has them. My point is that if dispute resolution procedures were in place then discussion about disputes could be curtailed to the benefit of all concerned, except those who relish dispute for dispute's sake.
It was agreed at the meeting that proposals should be sent in writing in email to the IMC-Ireland list. Not the editorial list. Discussion on proposals would take place here and on the IMC-Ireland list. Actually it already says this in the original post at the top.
And Chris above said:
Thus, as stated at the meeting written proposals on gender, alone, will be accepted
at the October meeting.
This is incorrect. In fact all proposals no matter what they are must be written and submitted to the IMC-Ireland list for consideration at the real-world meeting. Just as it says at the top.
I can locate specific operational procedures for handling disputes - want some?
Yes. No one else has put forward any actual ideas yet.
Got the list wrong, apologies.
I will then put here, in a couple of days proposals for gender prioritisation
and then send them onto the IMC-Ireland list.
They are based on an archive trawl from a feminist perspective :-)
I Bowdlerised this from A Big American University:
Complaint: A complaint is an informal request to the poster, forum moderator etc made in a timely fashion prior to any escalation or formal grievance. A complaint may be made on the forum ("please apologise") or in private. If the complaint cannot be resolved, a grievance may be filed.
Grievance: A grievance is a formal written allegation that there has been a violation, misinterpretation, misapplication, discriminatory application, or unreasonable application of an policy, procedure, rule, or regulation.
1. Step One — Moderator. A formal grievance must be filed and must:
* Be timely.
* State all the facts in the case.
* State when the incident(s) being grieved occurred.
* Specify the policy, procedure, rule, or regulation involved.
Response. the moderator will forward the grievance and must provide a written answer.
2. Step Two — Appeal to the Moderator
If the either party is dissatisfied the grievance may be appealed.
3. Step 3—Appeal to the Editors
If the grievance has not been resolved at Step 2, it may be appealed to the Editors
You might need definitions of what is on and off board, what time elapses between steps etc. Time is important a) to cool rising tempers but b) problems should be resolved before resentment sets in.
You need some Policies & Procedures - some of the invective I saw this week is an affront to dignity on sexist, homophobic and disability grounds inappropriate here - but the Protection against Harassment Act is a starting point.
Tom Eile, I think your question:
Good report ,but could somebody please explain what this means: "make a clear decision that the current Indymedia collective is only web-site Indymedia" Is there any other indymedia ?
Is the most important to come out of this series of meetings and discussions. But to deal with the questions re moderation – I think discussion of the moderation of the last meeting should really be led by people who attended this meeting. I feel to criticise the moderation of the last meeting from a position of ignorance and not bothering to turn up at the meeting to see what was in place is fairly destructive criticism. The meeting had three possible chairs, none of them members of the editorial group – two women and one man.
In my opinion, the woman that chaired the meeting was strong and effective and ensured that the time was very open, productive and inclusive. I think this is reflected in the minutes which contain an accurate and fair representation of the meeting – and quite a bit of work to achieve this. If someone feels that a TU chair is something that they desire then I think the collective that met in the Teachers club should and would consider this. But I would propose that to have an informed discussion about the chairing or moderation of a meeting you really have to have been at the meeting – or at least refer to the minutes to make your point.
I think Chris has the right idea – find places to talk about some or all of this process lain out above, put formal proposals together and come to the meeting and talk about it. The decision making process and the other elements of how this group will work will be decided at the meeting with one caveat – decisions that will impact on the operation of the website will only have validity if they are decided using a process approved by the editorial collective. All other decisions the group makes will be determined by the decision making process this collective agrees. (BTW I should disclaim at this point that I currently am an editor but speak entirely as an individual as does everybody else on this thread – all my personal opinion).
When Tom Eile asks is there any other Indymedia the question can be answered by referring to the idea of an independent media centre where people choose to collaborate and create under a banner that has flown over similar initiatives all over the world. So of course ths other indymedias. If you mean has a group met and decided to call itself indymedia in Ireland as a separate entity to the grop who makes this website – I don’t think in any long term manner although a large number of projects have been undertaken by people as part of indymedia. Temporary Media Zones if you will. I would hope there will be a formal proposal to this meeting to constitute itself as the Dublin Indymedia Collective and undertake to organise independent media in the Dublin area. It would be good if other groups were formed – with the support of indy.ie, the wider network or on their own with regard to the principles of unity.
So, is there other indymedias?
Only if you want them.
Don’t hate the media, be the media.
You need some Policies & Procedures - some of the invective I saw this week is an affront to dignity on sexist, homophobic and disability grounds inappropriate here - but the Protection against Harassment Act is a starting point.
Stuart, I hope you are aware that there are Policies & Procedures
here
http://www.indymedia.ie/editorial
which cover "sexist, homophobic, racist" and other grounds?
Also, you are aware that these comments get deleted all the time and that one of the accusations levelled at Indymedia.ie is that it hides too much of this stuff?
I thank you for responding above, but I don't understand how you envision this Moderator being appointed, or any of the actual concrete details. One of the useful parts of your post (IMHO) was that it required complaints to be specific, detailed and written. There's a button one each comment which allows anyone to do this.
I'd like you to point out the sexist, homophobic and ablist comments to which you refer, otherwise I'll have to assume that they don't exist and that you are making accusations that you can't back up.
Again, if you have a specific idea about what can be done it would be very useful if you could detail it. It would be even more useful if you could make that proposal without making unsourced allegations which (if left to stand) divert from the purpose of the thread.
"Stuart, I hope you are aware that there are Policies & Procedures
here
http://www.indymedia.ie/editorial
which cover "sexist, homophobic, racist" and other grounds?"
The guidelines you refer to relate to complaints about comments that have been published. It seems clear to me Stuart's suggested guidelines relate to complaints about the administration of the indymedia.ie website, which is a separate matter.
Further, I don't believe that Stuart made allegations of sexism etc. as you intimate, but rather suggested procedures to deal with such allegations should they arise, which is a different matter.
Not presuming to speak for Stuart - just an observation.
Further, I don't believe that Stuart made allegations of sexism etc. as you intimate,
It's not an intimation Paul Baynes. All you have to do is read the quote I took from his email, then go and read his email again. It would be helpful for everyone in this conversation if they avoided muddying the waters by the sort of "belief" that you express above. Please, read, think. Read. Think. It's VERY clear what Stuart has said.
Yes, you're correct - my mistake - sorry about that. Seems he did allege sexism.
btw, get off your high horse and read, think, read, think, read, think, yourself. It is clear that your reference to the editorial guidelines is a red herring: I reiterate - the guidelines suggested by Stuart do not relate to the hiding of comments.
There's absolutely no need to be patronising, particularly when you've muddied the waters yourself.
Thanks for the clarification, though.
the global docs projcts seems to have domain issues at the moment - theres a version up at
https://212.18.240.237 which contains the must read Principles of Unity if you were thinking of starting and independent media centre
Loads of Global thinking including articles on gender and other issues that have affected the global network.
There is of course the Indymedia Ireland pages which are noticeable for their use of the indymedia brand - of 120+ geographic doc projects, only Ireland and the Ukraine choose indymedia over imc as their brand.
I reiterate - the guidelines suggested by Stuart do not relate to the hiding of comments.
No Paul Baynes, you are wrong. I've had another read and another think and it is very clear that Stuart's email is in two pieces. In fhe first he answers my request for specific dispute resolution processes. In the second he makes an unspecified insinuation of sexist, homophobic and ablist posts and suggest that we need Processes & Procedures to deal with those posts.
Your intemperate and aggressive response that you read and think before you post is exactly the sort of thing that causes problems.
However, instead of being shouted at by you and insulted I'll propose a formal code of conduct for editors:
1. Editors should read posts very carefully before they contribute to discussions under their own names.
2. Editors should not engage in flamewars on threads under their own names (I find Paul Baynes very intimidating in this regard)
Now, please read and think about this twice before posting.
Dear Seeking Help
in reference to your missive of the 20th incident whereupon you proposed
2. Editors should not engage in flamewars on threads under their own names (I find Paul Baynes very intimidating in this regard)
can I thank you for the time taken to formulate a clear proposal but am unsure as to its appropriateness for Indymedia.
Are you proposing editors should only engage in flamewars anonymously?
Are you proposing that the use of the name Paul Baynes in particular is intimidating?
Are you proposing that issues like this are the most constructive use of the space and time given to the report on the ongoing process to improve indymedia?
I agree that 'Seeking Help' appears on the surface a much less intimidating name but can I suggest that the manner you have engaged in posting to this site and this thread may have been slightly less constructive than Paul (scary name) Baynes, and even than Stuart who at least put a series of clear proposals to the thread - allowing for the little dig at unidentified invective.
To that end can I suggest you try and improve your posting in future.
yours sincerely
C.
I thank you for your courteously worded and inquisitive response to my proposal.
Specifically, yes, I think that it is completely obvious that editors engaging in flamewars using their own names are intimidating to those that are not editors. If editors are going to engage in this behaviour then they should choose a nom de plume. It would be better if they didn't, but if they are then it's less damaging.
W.r.t. Paul Baynes he's incindental. The general point is that abstracted, unsourced and unspecific posts are not constructive. Your suggestion is one that I reject whole-heartedly and I find that it's exactly posts in the manner of Paul Baynes that are a problem on the site.
Sincerely, and doffing my hat.
I didn't realise girls were rare beasties on here. Most people use non gender specific names, but you can usually tell gender from writing style, and yes, it does seem predominantly male.
I find that female creatures are usually interested in other stuff, so am not sure what you plan to do about any gender bias. I wouldn't worry about it, if girls don't want to come here its their problem. Or are they too scared to post because of the men??
Maybe have a *women's issues* section? But of course there is no way of keeping men out, should they want to participate, nor should there be. Gender discrimination works both ways.
Its about time women started toughening up IMHO.
"In my opinion, the woman that chaired the meeting was strong and effective and ensured that the time was very open, productive and inclusive. I think this is reflected in the minutes which contain an accurate and fair representation of the meeting – and quite a bit of work to achieve this."
I'm not denying that is the case. I take it you are referring to Aileen, I would have the fullest confidence in her independence and abilities. But its not enough to be independent. You also have to be seen to be independent. If the chair is in the WSM and 3 editors are in the WSM then unfortunately the chair will not be seen to be independent.
"If someone feels that a TU chair is something that they desire then I think the collective that met in the Teachers club should and would consider this. "
I'm not suggesting that any TU activist just chair the meeting. I'm suggesting that Indymedia engage with either SIPTU or ICTU. They have staff who are trained in conflict resolution, specifically in the area of voluntary organisations, where there are sexist structures or where there is a perception that sexist structures exist.
The help that Indymedia requires will not end with the chairing of one meeting. So take the idea on board. Dont just burocratically suppress it as something that has to be discussed at the next meeting.
"But I would propose that to have an informed discussion about the chairing or moderation of a meeting you really have to have been at the meeting – or at least refer to the minutes to make your point."
I did not attend the meeting because Chekov had described those who criticise the editors as being "mentally ill". I feared that in such a poisoned atmosphere that I might do something which would result in me having to plead "not guilty by reason of insanity".
I think I am referring to the minutes. IMHO unless outside assistance is sought the second meeting will end there will still be 12 male editors and no female editors. There will be a promise of female editors somtime in the future.
If there is to be real change then some of the boys should step down at the second meeting and female editors should be appointed. Some male editor needs to set an example. How about Chekov? Anarchists believe in rotation and that does not mean spinning. So isnt 5 years long enough? Come on Chekov, make way for a woman.