portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

What's happening at IMC?

Why nothing since yesterday, and no explanations?
I understand that there is something amiss at IMC. Can someone explain?

I know why 18.Apr.2002 11:16

nick winlund winlundn@efn.org

all the IMCs use "central trust metrics"

this means everything (like official posts) has to go through the same central group of ppl. everytime.

this is great for a corporation.

this is BAD for a true activist site because with the central trust metrics come physically, geographically central command structures that actually EXCLUDE the majority of participants/contributors who are activists..

what needs to change is the coded internal mechanisms that run the individual IMC servers. They must be modified from the inside out. The systems/network administration (geeks) that is the IMC servers must be reverse-engineered to employ central trust metrics for security BUT also use distributed, decentral methods of authorization for letting activists IMC knows do daily tasks that need to be done (handle incoming emails, write reports). The reason for distributed and decentral is so IMC is not a single point a compromising network/physical attack can target. Maintaining site mirrors and DNS redundancy (3rd, 4th tier) must be done at the bare minimum. Remember 9/11/01 (r.i.p.) and you'll know why putting all your resources in one physical location is a bad idea.

Also the distributed, decentral methodlogy (possibly using a structured chroot() jail) safely cleanly lets other people help out IMC with large volume tasks like triaging incoming mail and endlessly redrafting activism documents.

it's that simple. --nick w.

blah 18.Apr.2002 11:51

blah

Nobody scans your posts before they are posted. It doesn't go through any central ppl before it is posted, a million dollars just says their servers puked, end of story. I'm sure an explanation will be up soon.

'coding beats moaning', John Fox@webcoders 18.Apr.2002 12:02

toni

well ... you don't know, but i understand you frustation, and agree with your anlysis partly.

here's why:

openenes of imc-tech has been it's strongest point, that's why the network grew so fast. the issue is not whether it's open enough, the issue is, as you righly pointed out, whether new people who join the pool of tech volunteer can find out who is doing what and what is there to be done. so on that account, daily tasks, as you call them, you are right.

on the other hand, when you mention:

"this is BAD for a true activist site because with the central trust metrics come physically, geographically central command structures that actually EXCLUDE the majority of participants/contributors who are activists"

this simpy isn't true. tech collective has, at it's core, ppl from north and south america, europe and australia. this is only to my knowledge. as well, many people think that tech collective is the most distributed and the most advanced one in the colaboration of all. show me another example where work happens 24 hours across the globe, where there are regular irc meetings, where logs of meetings are published, where documentation is as extensive as our and i will carefuly listen.

let's go back to the subject were you are right. we suffer from lack of coordination, a lot. it has been imporoved last two months since we resumed the habit of having regular irc meetings and since some of us threw our energy behind the coordination as the important task on it's own. we need to improve on that a lot, if we want to mantain the pace of openness and colaboration that we have set so far.

so if you are concerned, the best you can do is to join and help. we always lack more people since running 24 hours operation for such network is not an easy task for anyone, not even for corporations with teams far bigger then indymedia tech collective is.

for the start, since you pointed out well to the existing problems of coordination and projectTracking, you could join us at  imc-tech-coord@lists.indymedia.org, and you can attend our next irc meeting  http://kropotkin.indymedia.org/moin/moin.cgi/TechMeetingSummary . looking forward to see you there.

regards,

toni
[imc-tech]

hi 18.Apr.2002 12:11

atimm IMC editor

Speaking for myself I think perhaps both of you want to get involved - of course you are involved right now
by commenting on the newswire. There is so much going that editors who make IMC a focus and try to put up features at an appropriate rate can't cover everything.

As long as there is a features section that everyone feels should be in existance it seems for now there may be a certain type of structure (in this instance a collective one). Stallmans (from Austalia) origional server was truly an open forum and I think some Australian ones still have no features section. IMC portland has implemented the idea of autonomous committees or cells.

I think everyone stay involved in everything and post what you see and hear to the newswire when you can.

page to check Tech Status 18.Apr.2002 12:14

toni

i forgot to say that you can check latest tech status  http://kropotkin.indymedia.org/moin/moin.cgi/TechStatus - or you can come to irc at tech channel and ask (irc.indymedia.org #tech).

the reason why we didn't shoud loud about this new practice of monitoring web services is because it is a recent practice and we are still figuring out how to use it best.

hope this helps you in future when tech problems occur.

regards

toni