[UCIMC-Tech] [IMC] Bring the U-C IMC's only reliable historical record back to the public please.

Tue Feb 23 11:27:33 CST 2010

It agree that it would be good to open up the archives.  I would also like
to add that having all of the history of the IMC in email lists makes it
daunting to newcomers (me) to even begin to dig in.

I think there's actually more like 3 parts to this problem: access,
searchability, and organization.

Knowing that a policy or bit of information is probably archived in an email
somewhere from 2000-2006 and not knowing how to find it is a situation I
often find myself in.

-C!

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net>wrote:

> I can't disagree with the concerns that Dan raised or the misgivings that
> Zach expressed. Steering is something of a different fish now than it was,
> but I'd agree that converting the IMC list in this fashion just didn't
> strike me as the optimal solution to whatever problem or need it was
> attempting to solve or fill. But since I generally have little to do with
> things other than Finance, I felt that was up to Steering.
>
> I do think that the change was not a good one for historic reasons. It
> effectively closed the door on nearly a decade of UC IMC history. As a
> historian myself, that's never a good thing and I was just too busy trying
> to get my dissertation finished to realize that was what was happening with
> the changes that were made.
>
> Perhaps those that made them didn't realize that was what was happening
> either. So I'd support some means of restoring the former status of the IMC
> list. I think there must be a way to do that that could accommodate what
> Steering feels its current needs are.
> Mike Lehman
>
>
> Zachary C. Miller wrote:
>
>> I strongly support this proposal!
>>
>> As a founding and lifetime member, I've recently been asked a lot of
>> questions about UC-IMC history. I knew the archives were the place to
>> look and I was surprised to find them locked down. I signed up for the
>> list to gain access and was pleased that my sign up was granted
>> without question. But it wasn't clearly stated anywhere who has a
>> right to access, so I could have as easily bounced off of the password
>> prompt, feeling unwelcome, and never looked back.
>>
>> I do recall that historically there have been issues with a wide open
>> list archives (google searchable). There were occasions where we
>> manually excised identifying information from archived emails from
>> individuals who did not know that their message to imc@ would be
>> publicly archived. This is an issue the UC-IMC will have to address in
>> re-opening the archives: what is the procedure for protecting the
>> identity of non-imcstas who send messages to imc@ but don't consent to
>> having their identity publicly archived. Some possible solutions:
>> robots.txt blocking google access, a commitment from IMC-tech to
>> maintain a protocol for purging identities from the archives upon
>> request, archives open only to list members but list membership open
>> (unmoderated) to all with clear notes in the listinfo page about the
>> list joining process, or just open the archives and wait to solve this
>> problem until it comes up.
>>
>> Struggling with models for wide open non-hierarchical sharing of
>> information was one of the most rewarding challenges of working with
>> the UC-IMC. How do we run an organization where anyone can come to any
>> meeting and have a say? How do we make our mailing lists, which are
>> ultimately virtual meetings, reflect that same open meeting structure?
>> I don't know what UC-IMC's structure looks like now, compared to the
>> time when I was there, I applaud and support any effort to reduce the
>> barriers to real or virtual participation (even lurking in the history
>> is participation...you may not see the private discussions about the
>> past and future that this engenders, but they're there) in the UC-IMC!
>>
>> Good luck working out the details!
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Chris Ritzo <chris.ritzo at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Dan, I'm going to attempt to restate the technical details-  you're
>>> proposing:
>>>
>>> - imc at lists.chambana.net be reinstated as a public list, archives open,
>>> membership open to anyone
>>> -- posts to imc at lists.chambana.net get forwarded to both imc-spokes@ and
>>> imc-members@
>>>
>>> - imc-spokes at lists.chambana.net gets created and used for spokes
>>> discussion.
>>>
>>> You didn't mention this list, but I'm assuming---
>>> - imc-events@ which was created in october for local events posting
>>> would
>>> remain in place and is a public list anyone can join to receive updates
>>> on
>>> concerts, art exhibits, etc. happening at the IMC.
>>>
>>> -CR
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:02 PM, dan blah <blah at chambana.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hey all,
>>>>
>>>> Over the past few months various members have contacted me to discuss
>>>> our organizations history.  Very often the conversation will move
>>>> towards concerns of the U-C IMC moving further and further from its
>>>> original flat member empowered and controlled adhocracy to more of a
>>>> centrally controlled by a few bureaucracy.  Not being the active
>>>> member I was, I often quickly ask for a cite of assertions on the IMC
>>>> General list (imc at lists.chambana.net) where the IMC's Steering Group
>>>> and other working groups had been posting their minutes.  This mailing
>>>> list had for a decade served as the organizations most reliable
>>>> historical record.  Supporting that role, I tell them how important it
>>>> was for me to go all the way to the beginning of that list's archive
>>>> before even becoming a member.  They almost always state their
>>>> intentions to do the same after being told it contains the public
>>>> notes on how the U-C IMC got its name, who's basement the first
>>>> meetings were in, and all the other eclectic blocks that built up to
>>>> the building we all enjoy now.
>>>>
>>>> For me and others who were not part of those early chapters of the U-C
>>>> IMC, having the history there to read, review, and build onto formed
>>>> the core of how we developed our sense of ownership of the U-C IMC.
>>>> In this current time at the U-C IMC where many of the founding members
>>>> and past active members have moved on, access to this history takes on
>>>> an even greater importance.  Unfortunately, that history is no longer
>>>> available to the public or even most members.  Currently, it is only
>>>> available to 35 U-C IMC members.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks to the IMC-Tech folks catching me up, I understand why the list
>>>> is currently private and I am partly at fault for failing to focus on
>>>> the discussion when it took place last year.  All that aside, current
>>>> active local U-C IMC members are still asking me questions about our
>>>> history and now I have no way to cite my knowledge and they have no
>>>> way to learn as much as they want and should be able to about the U-C
>>>> IMC.  To maintain one of the core tenants of being an Indymedia
>>>> Independent Media Center that embodies so much more than just being a
>>>> community center, those archives and future notes and discussions that
>>>> define our organization must be available to all members and the
>>>> public.  I propose that we re-open up the archives that were public
>>>> for nearly a decade and continue to ensure Steering and all other
>>>> working group minutes continue to be public (as they also were for the
>>>> same decade) while respecting and ensuring those needs that lead to
>>>> its privatization remain met.
>>>>
>>>> The technical problems around this make the practical implementation
>>>> of this a bit tricky.  I apologize, the rest of this is a little
>>>> geeky.  As Bob proposed in October, instead of re-purposing the imc@
>>>> mailing list to be the private spokes and core member only list it is
>>>> now, an imc-spokes@ mailing list should have been created and used for
>>>> this purpose.  My assumption is that there was concern about the imc@
>>>> being the most common way people contact the U-C IMC and because of
>>>> this it was easiest to just restrict the imc@ list associated with
>>>> that alias.  What I would have proposed is that the imc@ address via
>>>> aliasing be forwarded to an imc-spokes@ mailing list and the old
>>>> public imc@ mailing list be accessible by emailing imc-members at .  This
>>>> would've preserved the highly search indexed public imc@ mailing list
>>>> archives, allowed a public list for recording as in the past, and
>>>> allowed a restricted private list for more internal functions.  I
>>>> propose that we do this now.  The main issue to this at this point is
>>>> moving those private messages currently on the imc@ mailing list to
>>>> the new imc-spokes@ mailing list and combining the imc-members@
>>>> mailing list with the older busier imc@ mailing list.
>>>>
>>>> All members, lets discuss!  IMC-Tech Group members, please lets
>>>> discuss what holes exist in my tech proposal on the IMC-Tech Group
>>>> list.
>>>>
>>>> In solidarity,
>>>> --
>>>> Dan Blah
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>>>> believed to be clean.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> IMC mailing list
>>>> IMC at lists.chambana.net
>>>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/imc
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>>> believed to be clean.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> IMC mailing list
>>> IMC at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/imc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> _______________________________________________
> IMC mailing list
> IMC at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/imc
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/imc-tech/attachments/20100223/c817d9f2/attachment-0001.html>