[IMC-US] Re: process for features and the future

[deva]

I agree that syndicated local imc features should automatically be 
considered worthy enough to promote with some basic consideration to 
national relevance and relationship to other features (making sure 
there is a decent balance of stories, issues, and to try not to have 
too many in the center column at a time from one local imc). Each 
feature is already passing through that local imc editorial process. 
Some general discussion of what constitutes a promotable feature can be 
helpful so that there are some common ideas of structure, flow etc. 
Then I think people should feel free to promote.

It would be good to also link related features from other local imcs 
when a feature is promoted.

I also do not necessarily want to adopt the global approach and mindset 
without some opportunity for real discussion. Fairly regularly I feel 
like a small minority with some views that are not respected on the 
global features list. All that said, I am really busy doing indy work 
in Portland so I do not say too much because I haven't much extra time 
to contribute.

regards
deva


On Nov 1, 2004, at 8:12 PM, bht wrote:

> so, my take on this is:
>
> I think that features that are not syndicated from local imcs should 
> have
> no process.  if it is a good feature and relevant the entire us and 
> meets
> the criteria proposed in the ed. policy, then promote away.
>
> for non-syndicated features, there should be some kind of process.
> however, i do not want to just slide into the tried and true way that
> global uses.  there exist many problems in that system.
>
> i think that for starting, it might be better to just have people post
> non-syndicated features to this list, and add them to the site.  this 
> way
> people know what is being featured, and we can see the tendencies that
> people go toward.
>
> as far as how fast the wires are moving, i dont find it a problem at 
> all.
> there is alot of stuff happening.  and alot of stuff that should be
> promoted and featured.
>
> i would say that the best idea is to suffer through the first few weeks
> with little process and let process develop organically as needed 
> instead
> of starting with an arbitrary process and sticking to it.
>
> the actions that we take are all meant in the right direction.  i am 
> sure
> there is a common vision here and we might, one day, be able to trust 
> each
> other enough to feel comfortable not always knowing what will happen 
> next.
>  if we fuck up the site one day or miscommunicate something, it isnt 
> the
> end of the world, these things can be fixed and we can come to mutual
> understandings.
>
> ultimately i guess my feeling is that the energy is more importnat than
> the process, and right now we have good positive energy.  adding 
> process
> to that is a sap of energy and i would rather not sacrifice this 
> energy.
>
> i hope that all makes sense.  and i look forward to working with you 
> all
> in the next couple of days and beyond.  we have a small part in 
> changing
> this fucked up world.  lets work well together while accomplishing 
> that!
>
> solidarity
> bht
>
> -- 
> bht at indymedia.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-US mailing list
> IMC-US at lists.cu.groogroo.com
> http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-us
>