US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
newswire selection process? (english)
04 Apr 2003
Modified: 07 Apr 2003
i don't know if anyone has already brought this up, but in view of all the right wing spam hogging the newswire column lately, i think we should at least discuss creating some screening or review process.
i don't know if anyone has already brought this up, but in view of all the right-wing spam hogging the newswire column lately, i think we should at least discuss creating some screening or review process.

the obvious solution is to have posts screened by imc volunteers, but i don't know how well it would really work out. even if the collective screened by unanimous or at least consensual decisions, it's a slippery slope towards self-censorship because a lot of lines are kind of blurry. some people might call a piece anti-this or anti-that when it's really kind of a matter of opinion. so that idea doesn't seem to work too great because it might be too fine of a judgment call to make sometimes.

however, there is some really foul trash clogging up the site and we have to do something. i know i heard that there is at least one indymedia collective with a rating system where anyone surfing through can rate an article on a scale from 'good' to 'terrible' or something of that sort, and if an article gets enough terribles it gets taken down. that seems to me like a pretty logical way to do things.

i'd like to encourage people to discuss this problem, and hopefully i'd like to see the imc take action of some sort, because the newswire is becoming worse than useless, an eyesore even. democratic media is one thing, but it's totally missing the point if we can let these assholes use *our* site as a platform for propaganda against everything we stand for.
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Response to comment on newswire problems (english)
04 Apr 2003
I agree that the IMC newswires are being abused by people who realized that they are unmoderated and uncensored, and thus, people can post the most hateful and vile things they want, with no repercussions, as the system is also anonymous. The issue of what to do about all this clogging is a tough one, but I like the suggestion of setting up a peer review system so that readers can participate fully in not just creating news reports, but also moderating the ones that are up. What IMC currently uses this system?
Chicken Little Hysteria (english)
04 Apr 2003
Oh, please. This is complete bullshit.

The newswire is *designed* to be the bleeding edge of incoming news fodder. The center column is where the collective uses its editorial control. Notice how the center column takes up most the page?!

Now, you can argue that the collective should be updating the center more freequently, and I would agree, but in that case you should stop your whining and get off your ass and provide some support for the IMC collective since it is woefully short of the labor with which to do that.

I'm really fucking sick of having this conversation with every "No free speech for [insert group you don't like]!" dumbass who happens to read Boston IMC once a month. "Open publishing" is not a difficult proposition to wrap your mind around. The bleeding edge is the only way you're going to get immediate, anonymous newswire reports, period. These asinine suggestions that the collective should individually okay every submission are so pathetic as to be laughable, if only they weren't repeated so often by those who have failed to grasp the simple, liberatory idea that was and is "open publishing". I'd suggest taking the drastic step of actually reading the background docs before you go around making the same hysterical "Something's gotta be done!" speeches that the warmongers seem so fond of. The sky is not falling, no matter how often you say so.

And let me say one more thing, while I'm on this subject. All you people who spend your time writing to the IMC collective asking for this and that types of posts to be struck from the newswire are authoritarians. Most of these complaints come from Sparts, the RCP, and the ISO. Occassionaly, the ANSWER people send emails demaning that we remove such and such an article that points out their relationship with this or that dictator / WWP front-group. All you folks who make up the bulk of these requests for destroying the open publishing system should be aware of a very central fact: Open publishing is the ONLY thing keeping your "Down with US Imperialism!" posts on the newswire. If open publishing is abandoned, the very first round of posts immediately disqualified from the newswire will be the genocidal authoritarian fucks, including the Nazis, the Zionists, the Boneheads, and - yes! - the Red Fascists. So, I'd suggest that you people - who seem to have been thinking that if you destroy open publishing then the IMC will be safe for "leftists", including your mass-murdering selves - had better wise up. If open publishing dies, you will NEVER get another post on the newswire, so I'd suggest you realize the consequences of your "Something's gotta be done." hysterics.
the newswire sucks (english)
04 Apr 2003
A long time ago a similar debate that occured on the global newswire made me realize that though we call the open newswire a democratic media, it really isn't democratic in any but the most tortured sense of the word (where by democratic I mean evenly distributing power and responding to the desires of most of the people).

It isn't democratic for the publishers - prominence is given based on who is willing to post more frequently and provocatively. The fact that Jon Chance at times has a significant fraction of stories on the newswire is not any kind of democracy I want to be in.

It isn't democratic for the readers, certainly, because I can't imagine most of the people who visit this site want to read 80% of the drivel on the newswire.

But perhaps we simply do not wish to create a democratic newsmedium - our goal may simply be to foster an environment where effective news gets posted and read. But by this criterion we are an abysmal failure as well, since most of the posts are not designed to inform, they are designed to convert.

So, to defenders of the newswire in its current form, I ask you: By what criteria is the newswire to be judged, and why should we maintain it as it stands?
Yes, this newswire is starting to suck (english)
04 Apr 2003
I'm not hooked up with the boston.indy, and my movement work
is already sort of maxed out. But it's clear that some volunteer time is needed -- maybe two more hours a day to weed
out the obvious junk ? So the whole Boston region would need
to volunteer what, maybe 20 more hours a week? Either that,
or the project will continue to have a really nasty look.

Actually I'd like to have a side-thread of some of the stuff
that was weeded out but still has merit, for those who
are interested in right-wing or ego-tripping characters.
There could be new link next to the Newswire, call it the "Butt-Ugly Newswire" or something.

The newswire is starting to SUCK. The collective should not
dither about censorship. I would be disappointed in the
boston.indy collective if something other than lack of time
is stopping them (and yes, I know it needs to be "us") from
fixing up the newswire.
no, it sucks (english)
04 Apr 2003
I don't think the problem is simply that the newswire needs to be "cleaned", and then we will find the gold that was buried in that silt. I have frequently observed that the comment threads are far more intelligent and thought-provoking than the articles themselves. I think this is revealing: it implies that the people who read this site are not getting what they want out of the newswire.

I don't think it should be the job of the collective to go panning through the newswire. It should be the job of the collective to create and maintain (with minimal intervention and injection of personal bias) a system that functions effectively at presenting relevant local news. I'm sorry, but the open newswire is just too ripe a target for crapflooders. I think it is a failure as a base point for Indymedia to build off. If Indymedia wishes to grow it must abandon or seriously reconstruct the model on which it is operating (to which the newswire is central right now).
To Indy Media (english)
04 Apr 2003
Dear Indy Media.....

As a former member of many collectives in the Cambridge/
Boston/Somerville area (60's/70's) who didn't just talk a
talk but walked the walk ( be that ego generating statement
or not ) I truely emphthize with the overflow of whiners
and wannabe revolutionary's I see consistantly bitch, bitch
and bitch.

You need to let them know it's your collectives time and
thus decision on how the BBS is run. It's not McDonalds.

One thing we knew back then, you can NEVER please every one.. so you make a plan and work that plan and march on.

I do know one thing.. unless the left can find a common ground with the rest ( non communist or money motivated
leftists who use people under cover of the cause ) then
nothing constructive will ever be acheived.

To those who want to keep a wedge the rest of the world
is "haloed" and the common people here are "satans incarnate" if they cary a flag, among other stupid things..
some of these people only want READ what they want READ,
thus the oppresion of the masses in most socialist/communist nations. Iraq isn't the only country
who consistantly commits genocide against it's population.

My heart tells me that most involved have a heart felt
involvement and should not abandon this... but my gut wants
to scream DON'T BE DUPED! And that is also a heart felt

If you want to see things change internally, ( no need for
"revolution" ) then the hatred needs to be fertilzed with
love, and a common ground platform created to bridge the
gap between the "classes", for lack of a better word at
the momen.

BTW: While I'm at it.. please add a spell checker
and thesauris, a button to domino's pizza home delivery
to your Indy Media page.. If I can think of
any thing else that will make IndyMedia work for ME
My Self and I, I will let you know in no uncertain terms,
cause aftger all it's only US on the front lines that
count who the muck are you?

(( I hope you found the absurd - was meant to be ))

Else, job well done, carry on. I really enjoy reading the
divers collection of articles, ( even some I consider
offensive/junk posts ) and some of the raps I have had with other members.

MicMac Merc
Link and comment (english)
04 Apr 2003

About a week ago there was this dialogue on the topic. Unfortunately it is largely my posts. I wish the dialogue had been more active. But one IMC volunteer did post a thoughtful response. Please see:

To "Open Publisher" -- Get over your arrogance, please. "Oh please, this is complete bullshit" isn't the way to open a comment about something that people really care about. Your condescension is so thick that I can hardly bear to read your comment. Anyway, please consider opening YOUR mind a bit and think more deeply about the issues that people are bringing up, for in fact white supremacist groups are a dire issue that needs to be dealt with. There are in fact valid reasons for questioning "free speech absolutism" while still valuing the concept. Your charge about those who question being authoritarians is also bogus, or should I say lacks some finer judgment. Perhaps you don't have to experience the threat of violence by a group whose platform is to hate you specifically. If you're a straight white male, let's say, perhaps you've never experience a hate group targeting you and making you wonder for your safety anytime you're walking around at night or even in the day. Are you in fact a member of the IMC collective? If so, can you give your name or at least first name? One more point --please don't assume that all anti-nazi people are ANSWER people or that all leftists are ANSWER people, or anything like that.
To Not A Clog (english)
04 Apr 2003

Hate breeds hate, labels create the beast. Volunteer to
be part of the Collective, then make your point.

MicMac Merc

PS: I invited some friends here ..but, rather than post
and whine, they decided not to post.

They may have a point and lead I should follow. I feel like
a whiner not a warrior when I read some I written. When I
feel rage and hate take over my person. It's been a long
hard road to peace not internal war about my peoples fate,
loosing that peace isn't worth the "I'm RIGHT - your WRONG"
battle.. a battle no one wins.

"He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbor cometh and searcheth him." --Solomon

"There is no good Injun but a dead one"
MicMac Merc
Make choices (english)
04 Apr 2003
You should do like some european IMC (see IMC Paris, IMC Lille and others):
You discuss and decide a clear IMC policy (such as rejecting commercial spam and hate-right wing-racist submissions).
Then any new article is marked with a visual reminder as "Unverified". Then it is reviewed, if it does not meet IMC policy you reject it. If it is accepted, it is marked as "verified".

If you don't do that the right-wing trolls will be efective in making IMC un-readible underground thing, except for old time readers and professional activists used to it. You have to choose: be a subcultural liberal media for activists-only or become a radical, alternative media and a concrete tool for popular education.
Sigh (english)
04 Apr 2003
I'm going to say this really s-l-o-w and loudly so even you can grasp it, not a cog:


Have you seen any Nazis posts there, NOC? Well, have you? Of course not. If the center column was being run correctly, which it isn't, then it would be exactly what the people above have been saying they want, a "filtered" version of the newswire. It wouldn't just be the residue from just taking out "right-wing" or [insert group you don't like here] posts, it would be, as someone pointed out above, the genuine news articles picked from all the clutter and noise of the newswire.

This is very basic stuff and again I state what I would think is obvious: READ THE FUCKING FAQ! Otherwise, we're simply forced to regurgitate the same fucking arguments that were made over and over again through the YEARS of IMC functioning all over the planet.

Actually, as this discussion progresses, it becomes obvious that many, many of you have no idea why the different parts of the site, for existence the center vs. the wire, are different or what their respective roles are. When you read your newspaper, you are seeing their version of the IMC center column. You never see, unless you have online access or something, the actual newswire which is absolutely chock-a-block with noise and trash and corrections and mis-inserted articles. THAT'S WHAT A NEWSWIRE IS! These constant whines that the newswire should be cleaned up or whatever are misguided for many reasons, but the fact that it would essentially cease to be a newswire at all is right up near the top of the list.

What irritates me about this inanity and this mushy, mealey-mouthed, "I'm a Leftist" bullshit is that the noise of constant whining about this trivial, "I'm-too-lazy-to-read-the-FAQ" shit completely covers up the real problems that exist within Boston IMC right now. First and foremost among these is that the center column is currently effectively non-functional. It gets updated so infrequently that it does NOT serve as the expression of editorial control that it should be and forces people to wade through the flotsam and jetsam on the wire in order to find anything. That's the real problem.

Now, if you whining people could kindly take your heads out of your own self-centered asses for a minute and realize that a) the different parts of the site fullfill different roles and b) fixing the problems with the center column will also have the happy side effect of fixing your perceived "right-wing" post problem, then we can set about fixing the real problem instead of being deluged with these idiotic requests to spend hours and hours coding what basically amounts to a voting system that is just going to be gamed by the Nazis anyway and will not ultimately solve your perceived problem at all.
Right-wing Trash (english)
04 Apr 2003
I agree that seeing all this right-wing crap on here bums me out. Call me an old-line "liberal"; but I think this is the price we pay if we open a forum as a marketplace of ideas.

Having said that, however, I'd like to see the blatantly fascist postings discouraged somehow. I like the idea of opening up some kind of rating system for posts--not for the purpose of removing those that are obnoxious, but to let readers know what to expect in advance of reading them. Readers might be asked to rate posts on a number of criteria (to be worked out among those who host the website) such as: fascist, racist, homophobic, anti-semitic, etc.

The worst of these posts deserve to be ignored; but, in order to maintain the integrity of the site, it should be left up to readers to decide that for themselves (with a little help from those who have reviewed them already). The antidote to "bad" speech is good speech...the more the better.
4th try (english)
04 Apr 2003
This is obviously a touchy issue. Good. Finally we get some passion. But why do we degenerate into a bunch of namecalling 2nd grade brats? I think it's about time to have this dialogue, and for good and productive reasons. I'm not in it for ego.


MicMac Merc, You don't know me, what I do, who I am. Don't make assumptions. "Not a Clog"? Why the slur? "Get involved with the collective"? (1) How do you know that I am not, and (2) why is any criticism from a nonmember called "whining"?


Open Publisher and your sigh...

You are still unidentified, in terms of whether you're an IMC volunteer or not. I gather that you are.

And your condescension has reached new lows. Let me state it clearly: I understand what you said and I disagree with it. It's not that I am "too slow"... It's not that you need to say it "s-l-o-w-l-y" and "LOUDLY". It's that I disagree with you. Got it? Good. Then hear me, not the tinnitus of your own mind. You will notice that I read your post, hear you, and respond to your words. Please do the same with me. I am not saying I am definitely right, but that I do have this opinion for reasons.

It is the presence of the white supremacist neo-nazi groups which is oppressive. It is not "[insert-group-you-don't-like-here]". It is World Church of the Creator and Vanguard News Network, and any other name that neo-nazi's may invent. It's the presence of recruiting material for racist cult groups.

As to "read the fucking FAQ" ... While I have read the various editorial guidelines, the FAQ can be changed and the years of IMC on this planet haven't birthed a just world yet, have they? (I assume you mean and -- if not, please direct me to "the fucking FAQ" -- and by the way, the guidelines on those two pages contradict each other, one claiming "no responsibility" and the other saying that "we do monitor it and remove posts" including for "inappropriate content". Perhaps you also meant I have also read this and I see that it does refer to editorial guidelines for removing stories, which are to be determined by local IMC's.)

As to "that's what a newswire is", that's also a misdirected argument. There are all sorts of newswires with all sorts of processes and standards. It doesn't imply that anyone can contribute stories. Does anyone contribute to the AP newswire that gets picked up by local papers? No. Only affiliated AP reporters contribute. Then AP editors accept or reject submissions. There's an example of a newswire exercising editorial jurisdiction. However, the AP has different values than the IMC folks, whoare mainly leftist or progressive. And in fact, I sometimes follow the AP or Reuters wires and notice that stories are even retracted after publication to the wire. Which sounds similar to what people here are suggesting.

Again referring to "that's what a newswire is", this newswire is not anything like newspaper newswires like AP and Reuters, in that it does not involve so much actual reporting in proportion to reposted articles from other sources, poems, creative work, and general crap of any kind. It's not like eliminating a "story" would be eliminating the perspective of a reporter's original work, who may happen to be a neo-nazi. It doesn't even have to be framed in terms of "eliminating" or "deleting" a story. It could be framed in terms of people submitting stories, and ones that are chosen get published. This is in fact the model that uses, and it seems to be successful by and large. A group of editors reviews submissions and within 24 hours publishes any submission they choose. In other words, the stream of unexamined submissions does not have to be featured on the front page of the site.

The one thing I agree with from you, "Open Publishing", is that the neo-nazis would game the voting system if that were used.


I think that there is an issue of integrity here, in terms of reclaiming our power. "Our" being those who have a new world in their hearts which is anti-oppression.

There is an issue of owning our own autonomy, as against the mythical concept of "freedom of speech". Or at least some refinement of that concept.

Progressive people have created the IMC network, with hard work and intentions of liberation. (I have done my part outside the IMC network, creating websites which I edited, for specific locales and for specific issues.)

We should claim the ownership of it and make it the most liberating resource possible, and if that means we have to rethink a webpage (oh dear!) then let's do it. I will be an active part in it and give my energy (so am I free of the whining charge, MicMac?) if people are ready to claim this power and define where they stand.

Nothing will be perfect, but we can move in the right direction.
reply from an IMC volunteer (english)
04 Apr 2003
I'm a volunteer with the Boston IMC. I think I've lost count with the number of times I've replied to people raising these issues on the newswire, so forgive me if this comes across as a bit exasperated. In short: We know there's a problem and we're trying to figure out what to do about it. We are discussing both creating a rating system and a completely filtered newswire. One of the main problems in implementing any solution, as some of you have assessed, is that we are short of volunteers. Any of you who want to get involved and help implement a solution to the mess that is the newswire would be welcome. As it stands right now, we don't have enough people to read every single article that comes over the newswire. I just skim the summaries looking for news articles to put in the center column and complaints (like this one). If white supremacists are posting stuff and it's not obvious from the title or summary, I won't notice it. Add to this problem that it actually takes a little while to hide an article and there's no way to do it en masse. Additionally, we have to work out the programming behind any solution and our tech team is really, really small. Hell, we didn't even have a local tech team for a long time.

Personally, (and I emphasize here that I speak just for myself, not the Boston IMC collective) I favor a completely filtered newswire. Some people (such as "Open Publishing") will doubt cry censorship. I really don't think that's the issue. I have trouble believing that white supremacists don't have their own websites on which they can communicate. I agree with Blitzen's assessment that the newswire is in no way democratic right now. What we have on here is chaos, not anarchy. It suffers from what feminist theorist Jo Freeman called the "tyranny of structurelessness"--when there are no rules to guide democratic decision-making, it allows a few people (in this case frequent posters, like Mr. Chance) to dominate. I would like to find some way for people committed to the IMC's progressive principles to find some way to collectively shape the content of the newswire. Perhaps a rating system is the way to go.

I have no idea who "Open Publishing" is, but while he (I will assume you're male, from the tone of your comments) may be a member of an IMC collective elsewhere, I rather doubt he's a member of the Boston IMC, given that he thinks we're using the center column the wrong way. Different local IMCs have different editorial policies. I know Portland IMC posts commentaries to the center column, many of which I have found of questionable quality. In Boston our current policy is that the articles 1) have some connection with the metro Boston area (a local event, a Bostonian involved, etc.); international stories can be displayed in the Global IMC's center column, which is what it's for; 2) that the article be news, not commentary, etc.; and 3) that in most cases the article addresses the issues in some substantial way; too often progressives complain that the corporate media just covers the events at protests, not the issues--and then go and post articles in that very vein on the newswire. Not everyone may agree with these standards, but they are what we have worked out in e-mails and meetings over several years. This is one of the reasons I would like to filter the newswire--so that good stuff that does not meet these criteria (and I really think that stuff that doesn't meet these criteria doesn't belong in the center column) doesn't get lost in the flood of right-wing postings, conspiracy theories, international news, rambling commentaries and pure garbage that gets posted here.
Laughing my Ass off Wet My Pants (english)
05 Apr 2003

Agree to disagree to agree!!

replying first to:
4th try (n a c 5(
Love it .. the picture says a thousand words..

Let me ask, "how do you know I don't know you?" (given
you writing style/pro se I couldn't pass by the obvious
question remaining

Actually you look like one of the lawyers from the old law
collecive on Mass Ave -- or a Vietnam Vet Against the War
I toked with in a dingy attic some where in Dorchester..
or... You don't look like a Quaker ( I could be wrong )
from AFSC... could be an out law of venceramos? Do you
remember a gal named Bobby Sollete(SP?) who ran the old
Lawyers Guild Office? Then I might be able to date you..
but probably never guess who... why do I have the feeling
you know me? I always worked best in the "shadows".. some
called me a shadow warrior.. Maybe you were part of one of
our food collectives? Don't know if that stuff still happens.. Thing is, most I can name left and went on to
become millionairs... if nothing else, they learned how to
manipulate the system to enrich their coffers.

You said:
2nd grade brats?

Proves a theory... the older we get.. we revert to child
like behavior. ( of this I am truely guilty - damn.. why
do I have so much fun??? )

You said:
"Not a Clog"? Why the slur? "Get involved with the collective"?

OOOPS! That Get involved with the collective was yours
truelys comment.. and a sincere one. It's asy to tell
every one what to do... but unless your willing to do
it, shut up and sit down. Write what you feel is important.. don't READ what you feel is not.. no censors
are needed but you.. if you don't like commercials..
turn the chanel.. if you don't like whats on the radio..
turn the friggin knob...

I will reiterate, "It's NOT the critic that counts,
but the man/woman in the arena" if you not willing ( if
locally able ) to get into the arena, you have no right
to critcize non-constructively.. constructive criticism
should always be looked at and considered... even then,
you will NOT PLEASE every one.. if you want to be a people
pleaser, you shouldn't be in a collective. A collective
needs to set thier GOALS and aim at that mark.. period.

I am also the author more oft than not of the word "whining"
as to my mind and ears thats what it is.. others should take
it and comment the way they see it.. a whiner to me is the
"mcDonalds" freaq.. always wants it his/her way... and will
whine till your ears are sore or you relent..

Then there are the Clique Word Freq's.. same same, day after
day, month after month, year after year. Most info from them is the red/white info.. if you say red, they say white,
if you say white, they say red.. If people are cheering
the troops, they will say people are jeering the troops.
Ifr you show them genocide occuring at the hands of one
of thier hero's ( financial supporters I might add, who, more
oft than not are funding thier mouths, and deeds ) they
shut up.. ask them to demo to disarm North Korea, Iraq..
etc.. they shut up.. no demo's.. among many other things..
no answers, period. Show them what these folks think of
Gay's.. ( beheaded in many islamic country's or dismembered
in public ) they shut up.. hey, isn't there a contradiction here?

Yoiu said:
so am I free of the whining charge, MicMac?

How much funding can you provide for me to say what you want to hear? ( laughing my ass off ) I'll have to run that
request by the tribal collective... or maybe run you through
the ringer a few time.. oh damn.. guess you got to me..
( as long as this does not imply I have been converted to
any thing ) OK.. you be free.

reply from an IMC volunteer (english)
Matt Williams had this to say:

I'm a volunteer with the Boston IMC. I think I've lost count with the number of times I've replied to people raising these issues on the newswire, so forgive me if this comes across as a bit exasperated.

If they are ANSWER, etc.. you owe them jack.

Most of these folks refuse to seek a common ground to bring peace.. any where. Their hate brings out hate and is not
aimed at constructive change, but destructive change.

If our nation ( depite who runs the usa ) is so friggin
bad ( which is an INSULT to all working people ) why are
there so m any people "internationally" "dieing" to get
here and become a party of the citzenry?... We have one
of the most diverse nations in the world.. with more
ethnic groups cohabiting within our borders than any other
country.. change can come from within.. but not waving a
bannor of hate, cnalling our troops baby killers ... while
sadam gasses wome and children..without a peep.. The usa
could be the vanguard of a world peace... but not by creating "unrest" no matter what it's coined....
(( hmmmmmmm I'm loosing it here ... )))))) {{ back on the
track }}}

My suggestion.. IGNORE those who want to stir the out house
pot... respond to the constructive critics..and move on to
attain your collectives goals...

personally, I enjoy reading both sides of the coin. and
have found info here I knew nothing about concerning what
Iraq Ruling Class ( the few, the pukes the husseins )was
doing to the curds and to some swamp people..the ecology,
endangered animal species.. yet I heard the whiners call
these storys by many "tags". What did they fear if people
read.. ???? I only use "me" as an example.. as it was an
educational experience and continues to be for "me"...
I do not expect you to base criteria on any "one" persons
likes or dislikes. Thats why there are "collectives"..
in a multitude of counselors" there is widom.

So put away the zantax.. and put on ignore mode.. and move
on.. doing what you been doing.. if you so choose to.

Geronimo had the right idea.. on collectives..
"The soldiers never explained to the government when an Indian was wronged, but reported the misdeeds of the Indians. We took an oath not to do any wrong to each other or to scheme against each other."

and......Tatanka Iyotake ( Sitting Bull )

"If the Great Spirit had desired me to be a white man he would have made me so in the first place. He put in your heart certain wishes and plans, and in my heart he put other and different desires. It is not necessary for eagles to be crows."

"Is it wrong for me to love my own? Is it wicked for me because my skin is red? Because I am Sioux? Because I was born where my father lived? Because I would die for my people and my country?"

and last...............

"I am the spirit's janitor.... All I do is wipe the
windows a bit, so you can see out for yourself."

-- Godfrey Chips
Lakota Medicine Man


MicMac Merc

tyranny of tyranny (english)
05 Apr 2003
hey, matt, you sorta proved open publishing's point by mentioning Jo Freeman to back up your argument. she's a big time authoritarian who only worte that article in order to slander the growing anarchist trend within feminist circles. there's a good thread about that on infoshop, but i'd suggest that you just read the reply which is the tyranny of tyranny.

thing is, matt, i sorta agree with you about SOME filtering, but bringing up Freeman just makes you look exactly like the authoritarians that open publishing was talking about.
on Freeman (english)
05 Apr 2003
I have read the reply to "The Tyrany of Structurelessness". Frankly, I was left with the impression that the author of reply didn't get the point Freeman was trying to make. Regardless of Freeman's motives in introducing the concept (of which I know nothing), it's still a good one. You need some sort of structure in order to preserve democracy, otherwise a handful of people dominate. Order and organization are not the same thing as hierarchy--consensus is a form of organization that can work democratically. (Of course, I've also seen it abused so that it becomes authoritarian.) Rotating roles like facilitators, vibeswtacher, etc. were, according to my understanding, introduced in response to the problems Freeman was addressing.
thanks matt (english)
05 Apr 2003
Thanks for your replies. I appreciate your time and your thoughtfulness.
To Matt (english)
05 Apr 2003


It ALL depends on who you are tring to "reach" or who you
are trying to "please".

Despite this "controvery" you have "people" that I know personally who wouldn't be reading here or any page like it
cept for the interest of all the issues I have seen presented.

If the "left" et al wants to ":preach to the choir:"
to exclude "others" from a community(s) nationally or
even internationally who dislike the "closed" and
thats the way it is approach, your on the right track.

If your pages intentions are to publish events to come and event that have happened that covers but one side of the coin your on the right track... though they seem to do
that know...

If you are trying to reach the average guy ( many who are
onLine these days - then some one needs to step off the
lefts pedistal and keep things earth bound so to say...
real, and mixed.

Every body wants to be "somebody" it appears and rather than
issues of argument based on fact it deteriorates into issues
of "i'm the lefts guru who the fuck are you to challenge my
thesis on these issues". and then.......................
there was "war". War of words maybe, but never the less
war.. and words leads to skirmishes leads to battles, leads
to wars..

I am 55 and almost convinced, without some divine intervention, man will always be at war.. no matter what
they deem to name their "cause". Advocating violence,
and violent over throw of the gov.. whats that called?
and these are the leaders of the "peace" movement.

Saying we have NO business interfearing with a group of
people who sytematically kill those under thier "control"
don't you know.. for the slightest thing.. ( is that
"really living cause you get some food and clothes to stay

Well then, what right do you have to go after any one with
the same end result in mind? I don't care what
label one has attached? Pure BS.. Like censorship..
pure bull shit... a form on control that no worker in the
usa is going to accept -at least those in the majority.
I just read an article here about some the USA was training
from Iraq.. their storys are heart breaking.. part of their
crime was "violating" censorship.

Is that what Indy Media Collective really wants to do..

Censor?.. or allow the user to change the chanel with a
click of their mouse button if they don't really like
whats playing in that message/news piece.

Whiners will be here till the day we all die, and exist on
both sides of the coin.. also there is the "personality
contest"... trying to please all to sat "popular"...

Then there is.. those who adhear to the premise that it
does not take collective guts to follow the "crowd"..
it takes colle3ctive guts to stand up and just be your
collective... many will bitch, but few will volunteer Matt,
one thing here that makes YOU and what you have to state,
in my persoanl opinion, worth reading.

In fine, my unofficial vote would be to just say no to
Censorship... else, get phpwebsite v.9 and setup.

Developed by the Web Technology Group at Appalachian State University, phpWebSite provides a complete web site content management system. All client output is XHTML 1.0 and meets the W3C's Web Accessibility Initiative requirements.

MicMac Merc
dont censor (techy take) (english)
06 Apr 2003

All I remember of the FAQ is that the wire is for news,
not opinion. I've probably skirted that in my own few
posts, and I haven't seen any attempt to moderate that
from me or anyone else. But let's say opinion is okay
in the comments at least.

I find contrary opinions - and contrary data - valuable -
otherwise there's a danger of preaching to the choir,
a "mutual admiration society" syndrome. Sometimes I *can*
change my mind. Too often, in fact.

But there's a difference between the participation/
censorhip debate, and spam (although I haven't seen
a lot I would describe that way). There may be technical
solutions to that. Ratings have the weakness that
spammers can abuse it as well (not that ratings wouldn't
be interesting for the inherent benefits). A class
of "privileged" raters carries the same danger of
ideological ganging-up-on - who decides who's privileged?

I think in time we'll see rating, and what's called
"reputation", technology - where you can easily focus
on the ratings of posters you have decided you "trust" -
or at least ignore those you distrust - the "twit" list -
that will solve the problem. An long as the "regular"
users outnumber the spammers (and given cookie support
or something to prevent multiple voting) some kind of
rating system could work here.

> I will assume you're male, from the tone of your comments

Isn't that a tad sexist? :)