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

[Ana Nogueira]

I second the idea of letting things flow until we can feel each other out
and develop our own organic process. But I don¹t think its too much trouble
to shoot an email out saying that a feature is about to be promoted.

I think that step can also help a lot towards the goal of having features
link to multiple imc's as much as possible, as there will be opportunity to
for others to suggest what else to link to.

It is faster and easier to simply promote one imc's feature to the center
column, and often very relevant and great. But a tad more work could make
the center column really more than a repeat of the feature wire: write up a
paragraph that summerizes an issue and within it link to various features
and different articles on the issue from multiple imcs. Ill aim to do that
myself, but over the next couple of days, there may be so many stories we
just promote away. 

Anyway, a great first day, and thanks to everyone that finally made this
happen!!! the site looks fabulous.

ana

On 11/1/04 11:12 PM, "bht" <bht at indymedia.org> 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