[Imc-web] Meeting Day/Time
Brian Dolinar
briandolinar at gmail.com
Sun Apr 13 13:13:03 CDT 2008
Fine by me. BD
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net>
wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> I was wondering if Wednesday, April 24 at 7 or 8pm would work to have a
> meeting of the Web group. What do people think? Is an alternative day of the
> week, time, or date better for any of those who'd like to be involved?
> Mike Lehman
>
> Mike Lehman wrote:
>
> > Dan,
> > Thanks for the reminder. Maybe we need to consider a different
> > date/time? Any one have a suggestion? I doubt that we'll actually need to
> > start having regular meetings once we all review current policy, etc unless
> > the group grows beyond those I'm aware want to participate now, but it
> > could.
> > Mike Lehman
> >
> > dan blah wrote:
> >
> > > just a friendly reminder, the shows group holds events in the main
> > > space from 7-10pm the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd wednesday of every month. i
> > > only mention this because i would like to partake in any regular
> > > meetings this group holds.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Feb 2, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Marti,
> > > > I've added you to the Tech list.
> > > >
> > > > A couple of Wednesday's at the IMC should suffice. The next couple
> > > > of
> > > > weeks are going to be bad for me, as I'm finally moving back into
> > > > my
> > > > house after the arson there. Remind the list in a couple of weeks
> > > > or we
> > > > can set a date to have a meeting.
> > > >
> > > > Mike Lehman
> > > >
> > > > Marti Wilkinson wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > How about meeting at 8PM Wednesday at the IMC or a local coffee
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > house? Weekly meetings may not be necessary but perhaps once or
> > > > twice
> > > > > a month we can meet so I can be brought up to speed on the nuts n
> > > > > bolts of the web group. I think I'm already on the tech list,
> > > > but you
> > > > > may want to add me to that list with this email. I no longer have
> > > > > insight as my email provider and made the switch to DSL.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Feb 1, 2008 10:20 PM, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > <mailto:rebelmike at earthlink.net>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Marti,
> > > > > I've added you to the IMC-Web list.
> > > > >
> > > > > Official meetings of the Web group have been infrequent in
> > > > recent
> > > > > years,
> > > > > with most work taking place on the IMC-Web list. That said,
> > > > there
> > > > > is an
> > > > > informal get-together that occurs regularly on Wednesday
> > > > evenings
> > > > > at 9pm
> > > > > at Crane Alley. David Gehrig and I have been the involved
> > > > editors of
> > > > > late, more through lack of interest by others than for any
> > > > other
> > > > > reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > We can set up another time to gather if that would be better
> > > > for you.
> > > > > There is a written policy, but interpretation of it is the
> > > > crucial
> > > > > factor in its use. We could spend all our time and effort on
> > > > splitting
> > > > > hairs on that, but our time is more effectively used in other
> > > > > endeavors
> > > > > as long as everyone is pretty much on the same page about it.
> > > > That has
> > > > > evolved somewhat over time and is something that is both
> > > > complex and
> > > > > contextual.
> > > > >
> > > > > The issues and perspectives involved depend on past history
> > > > and
> > > > > experience, as well as current consensus, which evolved from
> > > > those
> > > > > historical contingencies. There are a number of issues that
> > > > arise from
> > > > > the interaction of those factors that are difficult to fully
> > > > > articulate
> > > > > over email and are best left to the give and take of actual
> > > > > discussion.
> > > > > I alluded to them better than I described them in my post
> > > > from earlier
> > > > > today. Suffice to say there's always somebody who thinks they
> > > > know
> > > > > more
> > > > > about what our policy should be than what it actually is.
> > > > Those
> > > > > who are
> > > > > willing to participate in these efforts are relatively few.
> > > > >
> > > > > There's no problem with discussing it in public, in fact that
> > > > is
> > > > > what is
> > > > > intended in most cases. However, discussing IMC editorial
> > > > policy on IP
> > > > > is somewhat akin to asking a bunch of Democrats what they
> > > > think of the
> > > > > "great job" Bush is doing. It's not at all representative of
> > > > reality,
> > > > > let alone what the ideal might be.
> > > > >
> > > > > My own available time is fairly limited until the end of
> > > > March, due to
> > > > > other obligations. Please feel free to suggest a good time to
> > > > meet at
> > > > > the IMC if an informal discussion at Crane Alley is not to
> > > > your
> > > > > tastes.
> > > > > Email is another option.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are more concerned about website design, those issues
> > > > are
> > > > > better
> > > > > addressed on IMC-Tech, which handles that among its other
> > > > > responsibilities. Dan Blah is working on a major site
> > > > redesign at this
> > > > > time and I'm sure he could use help with that, since it will
> > > > redefine
> > > > > our web presence in a significant way while retaining our
> > > > historical
> > > > > emphasis on news.
> > > > >
> > > > > That is why I brought up the blog issue again. My personal
> > > > feelings
> > > > > about blogs are primarily negative, although I can see them
> > > > > contributing
> > > > > to the IMC model under certain circumstances, so please
> > > > disregard my
> > > > > opinions on that.
> > > > > :)
> > > > > Certainly your concerns about fostering a more civil and
> > > > reflective
> > > > > discourse are important. That has been the goal of our web
> > > > editorial
> > > > > policy from the beginning, since it sets an example for the
> > > > world we
> > > > > hope to make, rather than the one we're stuck with now.
> > > > > Mike Lehman
> > > > >
> > > > > Marti Wilkinson wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Mike:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Danielle did invite me to become a member of the working
> > > > group and I
> > > > > > am willing to get involved. My only limitations are that I
> > > > have
> > > > > > classes in Charleston on Tuesday and Thursday evenings. One
> > > > of the
> > > > > > things I stated on the Illinipundit site is that both the
> > > > UCIMC
> > > > > and IP
> > > > > > moderators have the right to engage in editorial decisions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have also found the site to be somewhat user-unfriendly
> > > > from a
> > > > > > design aspect which is one reason why I haven't
> > > > participated much on
> > > > > > the site lately. Again this is something I'm willing to
> > > > address. By
> > > > > > addressing the concerns of former IMC posters my intent is
> > > > to be
> > > > > part
> > > > > > of the solution and not the problem. Just simply ignoring a
> > > > > criticism
> > > > > > isn't always the most effective approach in a discourse.
> > > > This is
> > > > > > because I believe there are people who can benefit from
> > > > > participating
> > > > > > in the discussions on both sites.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Because the internet is an electronic medium we don't have
> > > > the
> > > > > benefit
> > > > > > of seeing the facial expression or body language of
> > > > participants.
> > > > > > Another downside is that often people are going to feel
> > > > safe
> > > > > engaging
> > > > > > in mean behavior online simply because the perception is
> > > > they
> > > > > can get
> > > > > > away with it. In many respects we are still navigating
> > > > uncharted
> > > > > > territory and I see us as the guinea pig generation of
> > > > internet
> > > > > usage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When a recent story came out in the mainstream press about
> > > > a young
> > > > > > teenager who took her life as a result of internet cruelty
> > > > that
> > > > > really
> > > > > > hit home for me. Being the mother of a teenage daughter
> > > > I've had to
> > > > > > talk to her about internet predators and trolls. This is
> > > > not
> > > > > something
> > > > > > that my mother had to do. I don't censor my daughters
> > > > internet usage
> > > > > > or stand over her shoulder constantly, but I do encourage
> > > > her to
> > > > > > engage in critical thinking and to use common sense. I have
> > > > to
> > > > > admit I
> > > > > > am so glad to not be a teenager and I can really feel for
> > > > my
> > > > > daughter
> > > > > > sometimes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With all that being said if you wish to add me to the
> > > > working
> > > > > group I
> > > > > > will do what I can to help.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Peace, Marti
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Feb 1, 2008 2:39 PM, Mike Lehman <
> > > > rebelmike at earthlink.net
> > > > > <mailto:rebelmike at earthlink.net>
> > > > > > <mailto:rebelmike at earthlink.net
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > <mailto:rebelmike at earthlink.net>>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I saw that same thread and it's nonsense. The last time
> > > > a
> > > > > reply was
> > > > > > hidden for content violations of our editorial policy
> > > > was
> > > > > November 10.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You also need to follow the website closely in order to
> > > > fully
> > > > > > appreciate
> > > > > > the context within which such decisions are made. About
> > > > 99%
> > > > > of posts
> > > > > > that fall astray of our policy are from anonymous
> > > > posters.
> > > > > I'll note
> > > > > > here that the complaining post that Marti quoted here
> > > > was by an
> > > > > > anonymous poster on IP. In the past, I have observed
> > > > comments
> > > > > > reflecting
> > > > > > the same dismissive, trolling point of view posted
> > > > within 5
> > > > > minutes or
> > > > > > less at both sites. That and extensive past experiences
> > > > with
> > > > > these
> > > > > > sorts
> > > > > > of posts indicate that there is someone (or _someones_)
> > > > out
> > > > > there
> > > > > > who is
> > > > > > purposefully trying to stir the pot, rile up people,
> > > > and get
> > > > > them
> > > > > > pointing their fingers at "those OTHER people."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That said, the anonymous comment that Marti quoted was
> > > > in
> > > > > response
> > > > > > to a
> > > > > > similar, but less inflammatory claim in a similar vein
> > > > by IP
> > > > > himself.
> > > > > > Knowing it had been a while since such a post was
> > > > hidden
> > > > > here was
> > > > > > when I
> > > > > > discovered that it had been so long since that had
> > > > actually
> > > > > happened,
> > > > > > making it both am,using and irnoic to read. IP can
> > > > wallow in his
> > > > > > ignorance, get fooled by Wendy's highly subjective POV
> > > > on
> > > > > the subject
> > > > > > and generally stir his own trolls up if he wants to. It
> > > > is
> > > > > clearly at
> > > > > > variance with the facts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What I find interesting is that last fall, after we had
> > > > pretty
> > > > > > much shut
> > > > > > down the troll here, he proceeded to go concentrate his
> > > > efforts
> > > > > > over at
> > > > > > IP. Back when Wendy left in a huff last spring, the big
> > > > deal
> > > > > they made
> > > > > > over there was how cruelly unfair our policy was. The
> > > > fact is
> > > > > > we've had
> > > > > > essentially the same policy now for about 5 years. It
> > > > works well
> > > > > > against
> > > > > > those whose sole intent is to discourage thoughtful and
> > > > > respectful
> > > > > > discourse at UC IMC. The Jack Ryan thing was where all
> > > > this
> > > > > started,
> > > > > > with that character going anonymous after even mention
> > > > of
> > > > > his name was
> > > > > > prohibited by our invocation of a software catch for
> > > > any post
> > > > > > mentioning
> > > > > > his name. I'm sure that a few mean-spirited comments
> > > > have been
> > > > > > caught up
> > > > > > by the policy as it has been enforced over the years.
> > > > In
> > > > > fact, in a
> > > > > > handful of cases the post -- which did meet the
> > > > standard,
> > > > > BTW -- was
> > > > > > restored after someone known to me took credit for it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What is really ironic about this is that IP has now
> > > > adopted
> > > > > basically
> > > > > > the same approach after growing tired of the same crap
> > > > we put up
> > > > > > with at
> > > > > > UC IMC for longer than IP has been in existence. Last
> > > > fall, he
> > > > > > adopted a
> > > > > > selective approach to dealing with such comments by
> > > > deleting
> > > > > them.
> > > > > > Please note that they are no longer visible in any form
> > > > that
> > > > > I'm aware
> > > > > > of on IP. This is in contrast to our more lenient
> > > > policy
> > > > > that allows
> > > > > > such posts to be hidden, but accessible to any reader.
> > > > Our
> > > > > policy is
> > > > > > actually more liberal at this point than theirs,
> > > > although I
> > > > > don't
> > > > > > really
> > > > > > care to compare or to shape our policy to fit theirs.
> > > > It was
> > > > > exactly
> > > > > > that point which Wendy was insisting upon that caused
> > > > her to
> > > > > leave
> > > > > > when
> > > > > > it was clear she was the only one who held that sort of
> > > > view
> > > > > and that
> > > > > > the rest of us had no intention of doing so. Of course,
> > > > I'm
> > > > > still the
> > > > > > one that Wendy and the troll both blame. I frankly
> > > > don't care.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would be glad to have more people involved in
> > > > editing.
> > > > > Frankly, I
> > > > > > think the webpage is a vastly underused resource in
> > > > general.
> > > > > But,
> > > > > > no, I
> > > > > > don't think any one is seriously interested in forming
> > > > our
> > > > > editorial
> > > > > > policy to resemble IP's.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would ask that Marti just ignore such discussions at
> > > > IP.
> > > > > Quoting
> > > > > > what
> > > > > > was said here is unlikely to change any minds there and
> > > > > would inspire
> > > > > > the troll to return here after he's given up bothering
> > > > us in the
> > > > > > face of
> > > > > > his impotence. He used to read the Web list and may
> > > > soon
> > > > > discover this
> > > > > > anyway, but let him take his sweet time doing so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IP has his policy and I respect his right to have it.
> > > > UC IMC
> > > > > has its
> > > > > > own, one that evolved through hours of discussion over
> > > > 8
> > > > > years and the
> > > > > > input of a number of thoughtful people, most of whom
> > > > have now
> > > > > > moved on
> > > > > > to other endeavors. I still think it serves us well,
> > > > but I
> > > > > have no
> > > > > > problem starting another conversation about it so long
> > > > as we
> > > > > have a
> > > > > > clear idea of where it's come from in order to avoid
> > > > the trap of
> > > > > > excessive idealism about what soon becomes the abusive
> > > > posting
> > > > > > behavior
> > > > > > of a very few disruptive individuals.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If people want to have an "anything goes" UC IMC blog,
> > > > I
> > > > > stated quite
> > > > > > some time ago I'd be OK with that, but I probably will
> > > > NOT
> > > > > be posting
> > > > > > there if there was such a thing. The issue of UC IMC
> > > > being a
> > > > > "free
> > > > > > speech zone" was settled within the first six months or
> > > > so
> > > > > of our
> > > > > > existence when we banned Bobby Meade. The first
> > > > principle of
> > > > > UC IMC
> > > > > > editorial policy since then is that it should foster
> > > > > thoughtful and
> > > > > > respectful discussion that empowers those whose voices
> > > > are
> > > > > silenced in
> > > > > > the dominant media. That is exactly what makes us
> > > > different
> > > > > from IP.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Most of the voices at IP are those of people who buy
> > > > into the
> > > > > > fables and
> > > > > > lies of the dominant media. They can tolerate a lot of
> > > > the
> > > > > shrill,
> > > > > > inane, and ignorant conversations that go on there
> > > > precisely
> > > > > because
> > > > > > that is the paradigm most there embrace. Time and time
> > > > again, UC
> > > > > > IMC has
> > > > > > found that allowing such POVs to get the upper hand
> > > > here
> > > > > discourages
> > > > > > those who have already been disempowered by the
> > > > dominant
> > > > > voices in
> > > > > > most
> > > > > > of the media.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wendy made this even worse by bragging that she'd
> > > > violated
> > > > > the central
> > > > > > tenet of a Indymedia editor's responsibility and, in
> > > > fact,
> > > > > of ANYONE
> > > > > > with sys admin privileges on a system that needs to
> > > > have secure
> > > > > > data --
> > > > > > and one that she had just been clearly reminded of when
> > > > she
> > > > > did --
> > > > > > revealing that she had chosen to violate the anonymity
> > > > of
> > > > > certain
> > > > > > posters. We are still trying to overcome that issue
> > > > among
> > > > > people who
> > > > > > regularly posted here in the past. I don't know all of
> > > > > them, but I do
> > > > > > know a few because they chose to discuss their concerns
> > > > with me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wendy poisoned the well so badly at UC IMC with her
> > > > > violations just
> > > > > > before she left that a number of regular posters have
> > > > just
> > > > > recently
> > > > > > started to again post, but only so long as they stay
> > > > > anonymous, since
> > > > > > they haven't started suing their old accounts which
> > > > still
> > > > > exist here.
> > > > > > But you will NOT see me revealing them to the world,
> > > > here or
> > > > > in person
> > > > > > to ANYONE. That is the biggest editorial issue we have
> > > > to
> > > > > confront. I
> > > > > > think that the only way to do it is through time
> > > > healing most
> > > > > > wounds and
> > > > > > continuation of a editorial policy that treats
> > > > anonymous
> > > > > posters, as
> > > > > > well as those with accounts, fairly even if they choose
> > > > to
> > > > > remain
> > > > > > anonymous. I think we already do that, but I'd be
> > > > willing to
> > > > > > reopen that
> > > > > > discussion if people want to.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But don't believe what you read about it at IP, because
> > > > most
> > > > > of those
> > > > > > who mention it there just don't know or care for much
> > > > of
> > > > > anything
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > than throwing mud at the IMC.
> > > > > > Mike Lehman
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Danielle Chynoweth wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Marti -
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Would love to have you join the web working group at
> > > > the
> > > > > IMC to help
> > > > > > > resolve the user problems with the site and address
> > > > editorial
> > > > > > > concerns. I have raised similar editorial concerns
> > > > in the
> > > > > past.
> > > > > > I do
> > > > > > > not think we should hide off topic posts, only those
> > > > that
> > > > > cross the
> > > > > > > line to abuse, engage is racist or sexist slurs, or
> > > > target
> > > > > > individuals
> > > > > > > for violence.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have not seen a lot of hiding of off topic posts
> > > > and
> > > > > would ask
> > > > > > those
> > > > > > > who have raised concerns to provide 5-6 recent
> > > > examples they
> > > > > > disagree
> > > > > > > with.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Some work has been done to create a policy. See
> > > > hidden
> > > > > posts and
> > > > > > > summary policy here:
> > > > > > > http://www.ucimc.org/hidden
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Danielle
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Feb 1, 2008 11:00 AM, Marti Wilkinson
> > > > > <martiwilki at gmail.com <mailto:martiwilki at gmail.com>
> > > > > > <mailto:martiwilki at gmail.com <mailto:
> > > > martiwilki at gmail.com>>
> > > > > > > <mailto:martiwilki at gmail.com <mailto:
> > > > martiwilki at gmail.com>
> > > > > <mailto:martiwilki at gmail.com <mailto:martiwilki at gmail.com>>>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've been engaging in participating in one of the
> > > > Rietz
> > > > > > debates on
> > > > > > > Illinipundit and one of the biggest criticism's
> > > > that
> > > > > the UCIMC
> > > > > > > site has it a perceived failure to allow
> > > > differences of
> > > > > > opinion on
> > > > > > > the website. Even though I was able to point out
> > > > that
> > > > > anyone who
> > > > > > > moderates the site has the right to engage in
> > > > editorial
> > > > > > discretion
> > > > > > > someone did post this concern to me.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *On February 1st, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Anonymous
> > > > (not
> > > > > verified)
> > > > > > said:*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *UIMC allows zero difference of opinion. I am
> > > > much more in
> > > > > > > agreement in geeral with its poltics than with
> > > > this site,
> > > > > > but I am
> > > > > > > astonished by the likes of ML censoring even the
> > > > > slightest of
> > > > > > > disagreements and labeling those authors "trolls"
> > > > as
> > > > > if there is
> > > > > > > some litmus test. It reminds me of the Stalinists
> > > > > sitting in
> > > > > > > judgment of their close ideological revals,
> > > > fellow
> > > > > > socialists, as
> > > > > > > to whether they were Marxist enough.*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *While I disagree with much of the conservative
> > > > posting at
> > > > > > > Illinipundit, I have never had a post deleted
> > > > here*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Personally I find the UCIMC site can be so
> > > > user-unfriendly
> > > > > > > sometimes it makes following what has been posted
> > > > > difficult.
> > > > > > That
> > > > > > > being said I do believe the anonymous poster has
> > > > > expressed a
> > > > > > valid
> > > > > > > and reasonable concern. I would like to offer a
> > > > suggestion
> > > > > > that we
> > > > > > > include specific posting guidelines on the site
> > > > that is
> > > > > > accessible
> > > > > > > to anyone who posts. That way if a post has to be
> > > > > deleted at
> > > > > > least
> > > > > > > whoever is moderating the discussion can have
> > > > some backup.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In addition I think it might be a good idea to
> > > > perhaps
> > > > > not be so
> > > > > > > insistent that posters stay on a specific topic.
> > > > Now if
> > > > > > someone is
> > > > > > > being ugly and abusive then obviously that needs
> > > > to be
> > > > > > addressed.
> > > > > > > That being said the complaint that the IMC fails
> > > > to invite
> > > > > > debate
> > > > > > > is one that I do believe is worth looking into
> > > > and if
> > > > > this is
> > > > > > > something that can be addressed please let me
> > > > know.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Peace, Marti
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Support Urbana Parks - Vote Yes in February 5th
> > > > Primary!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > IMC-Web mailing list
> > > > > > > IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org <mailto:
> > > > IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org>
> > > > > <mailto:IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org <mailto:
> > > > IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org>>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-web
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > IMC-Web mailing list
> > > > IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-web
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > IMC-Web mailing list
> > IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org
> > http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-web
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> IMC-Web mailing list
> IMC-Web at lists.ucimc.org
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc-web
>
--
Brian Dolinar, Ph.D.
303 W. Locust St.
Urbana, IL 61801
briandolinar at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/imc-web/attachments/20080413/fed5b9cc/attachment.html
More information about the IMC-Web
mailing list