[Imc] Larrabee Agreement Unravels?

[Mike Lehman]

I'm OK with unhiding it for now. People should look around at some of
the other slower-moving IMC sites to determine whether we really want to
be the all-Larrabee channel or not. Not that he is the only one, far
from it, but he is currently the "top performer".

IMC network spam is becoming a problem that won't go away, so this issue
needs to be addressed. Content is irrelevant, although the pattern of
behavior is quite typical. See my analysis in the Comment here:
<http://urbana.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=3483&group=webcast>

Maybe we should see what the tide washes in for awhile, until people
start asking "what the hell happened to the website, it used to be so
good?"

I thought our mission was to offer a place for news, not strictly a free
speech chat room. Maybe we need to have an internal conference at some
point to define what the difference is between these two concepts,
because they ARE different and sometimes conflicting concepts. The clash
between them is at the root of most of these discussions, along with the
LOCAL nature of our IMC.
Mike

Brian Hagy wrote:

> we're already trying to stop one person, which is almost contrary to
> our mission (i understand why we are doing such, just doesn't mean it's
> in agreement with our mission, maybe).  i would have thought we would have
> waited at least six or so months before trying to stop another person.
> 
> thanks for unhiding, paul.
> 
> brian
> 
> On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Paul Riismandel wrote:
> 
> > Mike,
> >
> > I'd rather let out a little more rope than that and let his posts be for the
> > moment.  Give him a few weeks to build up a track record.  It really can't
> > hurt us unless he floods us, in which case we can act immediately.
> >
> > So I'm going to unhide his post, and I think they should stay unhidden until
> > the next steering meeting when we have a chance to review his pattern.