|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Media |
|
Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
Current rating: 0 |
by malatesta
Email: malatesta1000 (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified!) |
21 May 2005
|
|
The UCIMC listserve is bristling with outraged commentary from IMCistas around the globe, over comments by locals in Urbana about its privileged position among the indy media network. The excerpts below were posted in the last 24 hours. PROPERTY CORRUPTS! |
OK although I agree with most of Ionneks points the one I dont agree with is
that, that was a rant let me show you what a rant is
this is serious shit and Urbana-Champaign aint taking it seriously at all
imho
ive looked thru their archives and concluded
URBANA-CHAMPAIGN's ATTITUDE REALLY SUCKS
here is why i think that
(parental warning)
if you dont like strong language stop reading now
the umbrella statement should have been deleted from every single Indy page
and the admins asked to remove it from the sites, hmmm did you ask for it
to be removed from radio.indymedia.org .. I dont think you did which was
where I found it and in mp3 form for all the world to hear. Quite literally
The fact that they havent published an apology and a retraction, all I can
see is individual members speaking for themselves only saying sorry this was
a mistake or (which is even worse) people quibbeling over points and saying
"oh but " or "it was only..." or only discussing "how we talk about our
fiscal sponsorship." Well how about you talk to the rest of the IMC
community and address these issues like 2 weeks ago
well thats not fucking good enough
are you people so out of the whole indy loop that you cant see that you have
transgressed SO much
who the fuck does sascha meinrath think he is? the fucking CEO of IMC.corp
(tm) you have one hell of a cheek mate, why didnt you retract the statment
you said immediately . hey is it because you'r better than us because if we
question you, we must be in the wrong and you in the right
This is what it looks like to me
"We are fiscal sponsors for the nebulous "Global IMC"." what the fuck....
you all sound like Paul Wolfowitz,
that it may well be right its a term, but that is used by bankers and
capitalists maybe with UC's attiude they should not now be anything to do
with the finances of IMC
and as for their building, "30,000 square feet" I hope they are going to
house some (alot) of the local homeless there. I dont think! but if it
houses any I would guess it will be loft style apartments not halfway houses
to get people offa the streets.
Spending 215 thousand dollarson a media center is somthing else, if it dont
bennifit the poorest in your local community then whats the point
remember most IMC's cant even afford a building some cant afford computers
that whole thing smacks of middle class america looking after number one
first
is it going to supply jobs this building? and if so who will get them?
And what really pisses me off is the fact that they call/sign themselves
Indymedia Radio. well pardon me for broadcasting but as far as I know there
is know such thing as Indymedia Radio unless it is ALL of the radio groups
that make up the radio and audio collectives
HOW FUCKING DARE THEY
I know some people wont like my language but I dont like sasha's and
UC-IMC's language to me it is far far more offensive.
As you can probably tell this whole thing has made me really angry
Andrew
ionnek writes:
> Hello,
>
> Although it looks as if urbana champaign are doing a great job locally,
> they seem to have a problem in defining their relationship to the wider
> indymedia network:
>
> "There is over 150 IMCs in 50+ countries worldwide, and this IMC here in
> Urbana Champain is the umbrella under which the entire global network
> operates. We are in essence, the global headquarters for the indymedia
> movement, here in urbana"
> (radio show)
>
> The Urbana-Champaign IMC is fairly unique in the Indymedia Network --
> being the only 501(c)(3) IMC and operating as the de-facto "global
> headquarters" for Indymedia.
> Sashas blog: http://www.saschameinrath.com/node/149
>
>
>
>
> So urbana champaign thinks it is the umbrella for the worldwide network of
> indymedia centers, and that their new postoffice building is the physical
> center of this network? Great. Or is it just megalomania?
>
> One of the differences between indymedia and CNN or other big media
> conglomerates is that we _don't_ have a headquarters - to the contrary, we
> use the capacity of the web for decentralisation. The only basis for
> Sashas claim is that uc imc act as a fiscal sponsor for donations in the
> US, i.e. UC imc admins the global finances, which is great. But if that
> makes UC imc the headquarters of the global indymedia movement, we are
> like McDonalds or any other corporation - headquarters is where the
> finances are. Great. I'd be surprised if it is only one individual in UC
> imc who takes this stance.
>
> This is crazy. The person who has been posting as Sasha Meinrath on imc
> lists seems to be in full posession of his intellectual capacities - how
> can he get it so completely wrong, at an important press conference of all
> places? Can this really be a slip of tongue? I don't think so.
>
> To blame the mistake on some unexperienced radio volunteer is bad style at
> best. The volunteer actually picked up the correct meaning of what was
> said. To send an inconsistent correction to this list doesn't make it any
> better, to the contrary, it proves that either Sasha or the entire urbana
> ch. imc must be, consciously or subconsciously, convinced that they really
> are the center of the network. Or is he not aware that there is a whole
> world out there which is not Urbana Champain, or even the United States?
>
> To be honest, I don't care if urbana ch. imc says they respect the
> autonomy of local imcs. I really don't need some imc in the US to know
> wether my local imc is autonomous or not. In case that's kind of an
> etiquette thing in Urbana Champaign, I assure the urbana ch. crew that I
> consider them autonomous, too.
>
> I don't need more of these "oh we are so terribly sorry, mistake,
> misunderstanding" emails - it was not a misunderstanding or mistake. The
> statement is perfectly clear, and it was, for once, a honest and utterly
> to-the-point representation of what sasha meinrath and probably more
> people in the ubana ch collective think they are. The fact that they like
> to refer to themselves as "the imc" is additional evidence for that. I
> really want to know what makes urbana ch. think they are central to the
> global imc network.
>
> I can't check from here in Europe what's going on in Urbana Champaign,
> don't even know if Sasha Meinrath exists or is just a collective email
> name that some jerk used to give a radio interview. But at least the
> people who just bought that beautiful postoffice (or was that fake as
> well?) should have the decency to tell the network of which they seem to
> think they are headquarters what makes them think they are.
>
> Maybe we should have this debate on one of their mailing lists rather than
> spam our own. I mean, if they are our headquarters, they can provide at
> least some server space, isn't it.
>
>
>
> best
> ionnek
> not-a-liaison |
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Who Would Have Thunk It? |
by fly on the wall
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
21 May 2005
|
It never ceases to amaze me how many closet Stalinists there seem to be among self-avowed anarchists. One person offers his point of view, it gets distorted into something that no one recognizes, and calls arise for the immediate commencement of a show trial in order to condemn the accused and apply exemplary justice.
I'm glad the majority of IMC activists are more fair-minded than the simplistic and distorted views that characterize much of the criticism offered so far on this subject. I assume the critics will soon be offering those of us among the unannointed a manifesto so that we can be careful not to stray from whatever party line they have decided for the rest of us. |
|
Irony and Hypocrisy of this Article's Headline |
by imcista
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
21 May 2005
|
The headline:
"Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements"
There is NO official response from any IMC cited in the inflammatory and factually incorrecct article that follows the headline.
A few comments the nature of those above hardly represents "bristling" bag of mail. In fact, this is more a tempest in a teacup that the author hopes to fan into a flame war by reposting a couple of the very few comments made there about this here.
As has been noted before, the statement in question was NOT a 'UCIMC Statement'.
And now I had better watch my step, because the IMC Thought Police will be after me next. |
|
UK indymedia reacts faster than UCIMC |
by just another tempest
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
21 May 2005
|
too bad the teacup is the world, imcista.
check out this site:
http://cambridge.dev.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/05/218.html |
|
Actually, most people in the world don't care |
by Joe Futrelle
futrelle (nospam) shout.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
> too bad the teacup is the world, imcista.
Another IMC site is no more "the world" than UC-IMC is the headquarters of the "global IMC network," or Al Gore is the inventor of the internet.
A little head-deflation all around might be just the thing. |
|
I care |
by El Pimo
pimvdp (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
Hi,
I'm a silly little guy living in a silly little country in the middle of Europe. I care about this issue.
I understand that sometimes it may seem advantageous to portray a project as bigger than it really is. You can gain short-term credibility with mainstream media and people by doing this. What happens in the long run, however, is that these 'little white lies' also generate interests which conflict with the principles of the indymedia-network. Do you either keep up the lies in order to preserve your 'power' and 'influence' in mainstream-channels, or do you hold true to the basic principles of equality and tell the truth even if you lose some mainstream-respect?
I think this is an important issue. I think at least one person crossed the line. Maybe malatesta did not choose diplomatic words, making self-criticism more difficult. But this doesnt make the issue less important. What troubles me is that this article is only answered with personal insults and minimalisation. It would seem normal to me, if there have been mistakes, that steps are taken to correct these mistakes. Attacking the messengers is not a problem-solving attitude.
I think if UC-imc would take these remarks for serious and deliver some self-criticism, it would not have all these problems. |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by La Ley
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
If any of these critics had actually come to Urbana and seen the UCIMC's old headquarters, I'm sure they would have realized that it was inadequate. They were paying rent on a run-down building that couldn't even be used as a performance center because of fire codes restricting the number of people who can be inside. If these critics had visited and toured the Post Office, or even taken a casual glance at the photos of the Post Office interior that have been posted on this web site, they would realize that the new place is not a palace--it's a white elephant that will take a lot of work to fix up. The immediately useful UCIMC space in the Post Office basement is not much more than they currently have. The main advantage that I see is that at least the UCIMC is not throwing it's money down a rathole by paying rent. They own this building, and can slowly improve it over the years. It will take a lot of work, but the local people here actually see the potential and are willing to help out.
I don't see any of Sascha's statements as being "lies" or even "white lies," nor have I seen him make any apologies for what he said, nor should he. He's not telling YOU what to do, so why the heck to you feel obligated to tell HIM what to do? Clearly, he is happy and proud at the conclusion of many years of work.
What "power" and "influence" does the UCIMC have in "mainstream-channels"? There was a small article in the local newspaper, and no coverage on local TV channels as far as I can tell. Amy Goodman mentioned the Post Office purchase on Democracy Now! when she passed through town, but Amy is not "mainstream," is she? You might want to correct your own mistakes before asking others to correct theirs. We who are acually in Urbana/Champaign and willing to show our faces, will correct our own, thank you. |
|
@La Ley |
by someone
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
Do you have the slightest idea what is going on the *network*?
Most people can live with the fact that uc imc bought this post office and most people know that uc imc is doing a good job in promoting independent media work ect.
But by beeing in a network (which Indymedia certainly is) uc imc has also some responsibility to the rest of the network.
By saying that uc imc is the "headquarter of the global network" and other stupid things (even if these quotes are jut from one volunteer of uc imc) make things so damn difficult.
And it is absolutley not helpful if the only real response to that is "we'll discuss is at our next meeting next thursday".
You don't seem to realise that many people in the network are just pissed off by these comments.
And if the uc imc collective would have followed the global process and discussions on the various global mailinglists or in IRC, all this could have been avoided.
And about your comments:
"If any of these critics had actually come to Urbana and seen the UCIMC's old headquarters, I'm sure they would have realized that it was inadequate"
You know, some people can't afford to just "come to urbana" and it doesn't even matter in this case.
Another comment:
"I don't see any of Sascha's statements as being "lies" or even "white lies," nor have I seen him make any apologies for what he said, nor should he. He's not telling YOU what to do, so why the heck to you feel obligated to tell HIM what to do? Clearly, he is happy and proud at the conclusion of many years of work."
Well...I see not lies, but an absolut misunderstanding by Sascha what the indymedia really network is. He's not our leader or something else. Most people in the network didn't even know where urbana is, before this postoffice-center-of-the-network crap came on the surface.
And his comments *are* telling *us* something, namely what he thinks of the network.
So, please, take the critic seriously and don't think it only comes from "closet Stalinists" (see comment one) or single persons within the network...it seems to me some of you have no idea of the impact these things have. |
|
What Stalinism Is |
by fly on the wall
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
Stalinism is insisting that there is or should be some sort of party line that Indymedia activists must submit themselves to.
Stalinism is attempts to punish or silence those who disagree with a perceived party line (even if it is claimed that no such line exists).
Stalinism is failing to realize that you own disagreement with what someone said, pursued in this vindictive manner, could end up setting a precedent, putting your own head under the guillotine at some future date when you least expect it.
Sascha offered his opinion. The critics have offered theirs. It's time to move on to more productive business. I don't know many of the critics, but I suspect if they had ever done as much for Indymedia as Sascha has, they might have had the opportunity to say something that someone else disagrees with. |
|
@fly on the wall |
by someone
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
Hi!
First: The McCarthy Area is over...
It's kinda sad that you dismiss every critic with stalinism, thats bad style and characterless.
Anyway, the symptoms you described (what stalinism is..) are also fit for the word "stuck-upness". Sure, Sascha may have done alot for independent media, but thats not the point.
Oh..and about your comment:
"I don't know many of the critics, but I suspect if they had ever done as much for Indymedia as Sascha has, they might have had the opportunity to say something that someone else disagrees with."
wtf...indymedia is not a contest of who did the most. Do you really think that Sascha or anyone else has more rights to say something than others? What kind of ideology is that?
You promote an inequality and a powerstructure inside the network with such a comment...thats a shame... |
|
@ someone |
by La Ley
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
Hello, someone. Ask yourself this question: What horrible thing did Sascha ever do to you to warrant your repeated (and pointless) attacks on his integrity? You provide the answer in your own post: Nothing. Move on, get a life. If you spent as much energy in building your own IMC (where would that be, exactly?) as you do in tearing UCIMC down, you'd be that much further ahead.
PS -- Thanks for admitting that Sascha didn't lie. |
|
@ someone [2] |
by La Ley
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
|
One more thing, someone. UCIMC is an INDEPENDENT media center. Did Sascha ever tell you what to do or how to spend your money? No? Well, don't tell us what to do either, and start showing a little independence and integrity of your own. We'll take care of our own problems here, locally, thank you. |
|
Issues != character |
by Joe Futrelle
futrelle (nospam) shout (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
> Attacking the messengers is not a problem-solving attitude.
Couldn't agree more.
I doubt Sascha's fitful delusions of grandeur are the real problem here. His comment obviously touched a nerve, because people are so quick to assume his comment represented a widely-held view at the UC-IMC.
As a UC-IMC member I can report that lots of us don't feel like the UC-IMC is the global headquarters of anything. We see it as a part of *our* community, and we don't go to all the meetings where its relationship to other IMC's is managed.
There's a reason we don't go to those meetings--they can be contentious and some of the disagreements can be difficult to resolve. In fact, the situation is probably fundamentally intractable unless Indymedia abandons its commitment to local autonomy--which I really don't think it should do.
So it's annoying when those disagreements spill onto the newswire. They're not news for most people, who use the IMC sites as news sites and not as a place to keep score in all the endless bickering within and among Indymedia organizations.
Which is not to minimize that there are real issues of autonomy, political issues of how the Indymedia network portrays itself, how resources are allocated, etc. etc. etc. Reasonable people will disagree on those issues. Performing a character assassination on Sascha, or any of his critics, will not resolve these issues. |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by Someone else
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
|
Traditional behavior of ucimc is much worse than Stalinism. I would say that their way of conducting conversation on their web, attempts of their leaders without ANY reasons to become the decisive leaders of Indy media could be better compared to Hitlerism. Anyhow, ucimc and its leaders present an example of the serious basket case, and I don't think that one can succeed trying to explain it to them. As they wouldn't admit it, no matter how rightful, obvious and convincing the reasoning of this possible one might be. |
|
Some context |
by La Ley
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
After doing some digging around, I found that the comments that malatesta originally posted came off of the IMC-communication list WITHOUT any attribution or context provided. (Sloppy journalism, malatesta, shame on you! ;-) The link for this list is http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-communication/
The comments that malatesta provided can be found in their full context in the May 2005 archives, and the email addresses of the posters appear with their comments.
I don't know how the IMC-communication list is going to feel about its internal discussions being selectively used as cannon-fodder on other IMC websites. Are there any precedents for this? Are we free to troll the various IMC lists for information to use against our enemies? I'm curious.
To those of you who are as much in the dark as I was, Sascha's press release and the IMC Radio News story about UCIMC's purchase of the Urbana Post Office pissed off a bunch of people worldwide because Sascha said something to the effect that the UCIMC was the center of the global indymedia movement. Sascha clarified this statement by saying that he was referring to the fact that UCIMC is an umbrella group for obtaining tax-exempt status for various US IMC affiliates. Of course, the worldwide IMC's and the US IMC's that are not affiliated with UCIMC are still pissed off about this, especially since Sascha hasn't edited the word "global" out of the press release. Some of the comments verge on the shrill and extreme, and one person hinted that UCIMC should be kicked out of the global IMC network for arrogance. I'm not involved with UCIMC's liaison to the global network, but I must say that some diplomacy is in order.
Returning to what others have said in this thread, some people have been posting comments from outside the Champaign/Urbana community, and while it's fine to express what you think about the UCIMC, realize that if you're going to persist in being negative and tearing down the UCIMC, you're going to piss off the people who actually live here and participate in the UCIMC's decisionmaking processes. Screaming might make you feel good, but it's going to have the opposite effect of what you're trying to accomplish, which apparently is an apology and some humility from UCIMC representatives. |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by Someone else
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
Watching on this web how ucimc had treated their opponents apparently from the neighborhood, I would say that they ARE FULLY INCAPABLE to admit that they (meaning leaders of ucimc) are EVER wrong, no matter how obvious it is.
The formal apology is what you, leaders of ucimc, need to produce for your own future behalf. Nobody needs and would butter you to get it. You are building your own tomb or shoveling your own grave (whichever comparison you like more). |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
It's my understanding that it's is not incorrect to say that the UC-IMC is the fiscal sponsor of the Global Indymedia Network -- that is, the collective that does the website www.indymedia.org, usually referred to as "Global." When I look here:
http://www.indymedia.org/en/static/contact.shtml
I see a very clear call for volunteers to engage locally.
When I look here:
http://www.indymedia.org/en/static/support.shtml
I see that UC-IMC is acting, not as The Imperial Commissar of Global Indymedia, but as the folks doing the books for the Global Indymedia collective.
But people are getting confused, thinking that by claiming "We're the fiscal sponsor of the Global Indymedia Network," UC-IMC is really claiming that they somehow own all of Indymedia. That's not what UC-IMC is saying at all.
@%< |
|
Who to Take Responsibility and Why? |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
UC IMC has a variety of active groups of volunteers with many responsibilities. Over the years, we have comitted to by consensus and seen to fruition many important projects, both locally and as a participant in the global network of IMCs.
Sascha is among a few local IMCistas who consistently have comitted the effort to working on and communicating about global issues in the IMC network. The work in question involves dealing with paying bills and other stuff no one else wanted to do, but needed to be done. It has never been a completely comfortable arrangement, but it has been one where effective work has been done in a responsible manner over a period of years.
Sascha, mostly because he has put in literally hundreds of hours at this thankless job, and a few others have helped make this possible, at no small expense to their other work, in life and at the IMC, their political organizing on other projects, and their social lives.
Sascha is entitled to his opinion, even when it is clear that the manner in which it was subsequently communicated made a bad turn of phrase inadvertently sound like some sinister plot -- like some Indy urban legend to anyone who knows what our relationships really are. It certainly has created a bad impression on some, and the possible misinterpretations that are understandable given its imprecise construction.
Sascha, among all those at UC IMC who have been involved with global issues on any level, has probably been our most consistent participant in such work. As such, he has also consistently encouraged other UC IMC members to get involved on the various global lists on different projects and to help support the work we have already committed to do.
And some have. I am at least familiar with the fact that this dust-up is pretty much a rerun of previous concerns by virtue of my being a somewhat spotty reader of the various lists most relevant to dealing with the global IMC issues.
The responsibility lies in this, in my opinion, in a very clear place -- one I tried to move the discussion to Thursday night, by noting that the low rate of participation of IMC volunteers makes us vulnerable to such by virtue of not having more voices involved in global lists, on global work our IMC has comitted to, and in other IMC projects.
I do not mean to be too harsh on my comrades, because quite frankly, UC IMC is really no better off than many IMCs in its participation in the wider network. It's something we should work on and this could well be a very valid recommendation to come out of the group that volunteered to address these concerns at last Thursday's Steering meeting.
It still seems somewhat controversial to have a discussion about how if Sascha has had insufficient guidance from people on how we feel about it , then it is our own fault, at least as much as it is his.
UC IMC has a number of responsibilities. We have a good record of meeting those responsibilities. And there is also a record where a number of issues like this, mainly in dealing with financial responsibilities, happen because of just a few dedicated volunteers. Sascha's and other's suggestions about more UC IMC people getting involved with global lists are important -- and have frequently been ignored.
A larger percentage of global IMC particpants would at least have the best grasp of the facts possible in starting any discussion about the convoluted and often conflicting global IMC networks and groups and how UC IMC interacts with them.
If more centralised guidance is thought necessary in the future, then that will need to be addressed, but that idea leaves me pretty cold. We have always placed an emphasis on worker-organized work at this IMC. If people think that they can say it better about the IMC in work like this, let them step forward. We have planty to do. Welcome and I'm sure you'll have your mis-steps and foibles -- and most of us will probably be more willing to talk with you about it, than attack you.
I believe that it is all of our responsibility to not just criticize, but participate, in being informed enough about global issues to keep things in context and to be involved enough not to always leave it the same group of volunteers to do the less than glamorous work of paying bills.
That is why I supported looking at the criticisms we receive, as well as what we've done right, what the extent of the responsibilities we have are, and come to terms with it in some fashion that maintains the responsible record we have.
I simply will not support blaming someone for a remark taken out of context, and who is now well aware that it remains a sensitive issue, when there are so many of our own who haven't done enough to support UC IMC's global responsilities.
Every one of us shares the blame, if someone really has to have a scapegoat. But we generally have found vindictive and punitive approaches to our internal problems are something to be intentionally avoided. If we have differences, I would much rather sit down and talk them out. The accussatory and over the top nature of much of this discussion fails the most basic test of criticism -- self-introspection. If you cannot find yourself blameless, then you should be careful about throwing stones. We're all human. |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by Mink!
mink (nospam) tcp.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
22 May 2005
|
Heaven forbid a group attempt to buy a building in order to obtain equity and get to a place where it doesn't have to worry about possible eviction at the whim of a landlord. Heavens, they might actually be able to use the equity to do something useful.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but in my experience the people who have the most ideological problems with acquiring either money or property equity aren't those who have none - it's those who have come from priviledge and feel guilty about it.
Wearing a self-imposed hairshirt doesn't really do a whole lot to help anyone else.
As a Champaign-Urbana resident who lives near the new building in question, has been to events in the old building to see how it's simply too cramped for the activities it tries to hold, and who has actually contributed toward both rehabbing the existing rental building and purchasing the new one, I'm quite happy with developments. |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by Paul Riismandel
paul (nospam) mediageek.org (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
23 May 2005
|
If you are visiting this thread from a direct link, please take a look at the statement of apology released by the UCIMC Video Working Group on May 22:
http://www.ucimc.org/feature/display/35878/index.php |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by joe from arknasas imc
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2005
|
I am just amazed that people would spend so much time attacking one IMCista. I am sure that everyone has been to multiple IMC meetings and heard statements that absolutely infuriated them.
My response is to say my piece but realize that tearing down one dedicated IMC volunteer does nothing constructive. I am sure that Sascha is about ready to throw in the towel and say fuck all of yall to every one of you character assasins and that is what really pisses me off. Who is going to do all of the work that he does for the whole network?????? Not me...I dont have the time or constitution to stand up to all the shit that gets slung at anyone who does large projects with Indymedia.
Crappy as it is IMC depends on dedicated people with free time......... locally and globally.
If someone else wants to house our collective funds....which generally funnel American money to poorer countries....please do but dont forget your shitstorm raincoat.
I have to go now and work on constructive ARkasnas audio projects, unlike some who spend hours attacking anonomysly |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by so sad
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
24 May 2005
|
|
I don't think the "attack" is on Sascha. It is on that the ucimc doesn't care if it hurt or offends its allies. It was a simple mistake, everyone is too proud to just say sorry. |
|
Re: Worldwide IMCs Respond to UCIMC Statements |
by global south
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
28 May 2005
|
|
Gimme a break. We're talking about a local IMC project located in a small college burg in central Bumblefuck, Illinois. in the US Midwest. Not exactly on the cutting edge of world affiairs. One IMC out of 150 and growing. They decidely are not the global IMC center. The laughter at such an assertion spans 5 continents and three oceans. |
|
