New Anarchist discussion forum- Anarchist Black Cat

167 posts / 0 new
Last post
gurrier
Offline
Joined: 30-01-04
Feb 12 2008 13:55
pingtiao wrote:
gurrier wrote:
My biggest problem with infoshop is the woeful double standards in moderation. While I think libcom has a terrible, woeful moderation policy which encourages the worst types of trolling, at least the policy (i.e "Anything GOEZ!!! L4m3rZ SUKZ!!) is applied reasonably fairly across the board. Your average mainstream - or even right wing - board has much more balanced moderation than infoshop. I really don't get how Chuck 0 can reconcile such hypocrisy with his politics.

That is itself a troll. If you don't like trolling on here, stop posting.

The point of this site is not the forum, it is the vast resource that we have built up. As you will find out, modding a board with people on it is quite time consuming, and as most of the attention of the mods on here is directed towards the actually useful areas of the site, not much close modding gets done.

It's not trolling at all and I always remain well within the bounds of what you lot consider acceptable behaviour on the forum. If you want to go after trolls, you'd have a long list to get through before you got to me. If you don't like what I'm saying, come up with some better moderation policies, don't expect me to self-impose a totally different moderation policy on myself than you lot impose on the rest of the site.

The idea that I have some sort of duty to behave as if there was a reasonable moderation policy while comedy trolls like carousel troll the boards and cyber-bullies abuse people at will is to my mind crazy.

Certainly I agree with you that the library and so on are the major contributions of libcom and I think they are generally very good. That should not preclude me from expressing my reasonable opinion about the forum though. I really think the forum is a poisonous place which has a real negative influence on anarchism in the UK and beyond. I have no ability to change this, all I can do is let my opinion be known. You are the ones who can change it and you are the ones who abdicate responsibility completely by trying to push the responsibility on to users such as me.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 12 2008 14:01
Quote:
It's not trolling at all and I always remain well within the bounds of what you lot consider acceptable behaviour on the forum. If you want to go after trolls, you'd have a long list to get through before you got to me. If you don't like what I'm saying, come up with some better moderation policies, don't expect me to self-impose a totally different moderation policy on myself than you lot impose on the rest of the site.

We have quite clear guidelines of acceptable behaviour, what we don't have is consistent implementation of those guidelines, for the reasons pingtiao states. If you're not prepared to exercise any self control yourself, then your opinion carries zero weight when you make complaints.

gurrier
Offline
Joined: 30-01-04
Feb 12 2008 14:16
Mike Harman wrote:
Quote:
It's not trolling at all and I always remain well within the bounds of what you lot consider acceptable behaviour on the forum. If you want to go after trolls, you'd have a long list to get through before you got to me. If you don't like what I'm saying, come up with some better moderation policies, don't expect me to self-impose a totally different moderation policy on myself than you lot impose on the rest of the site.

We have quite clear guidelines of acceptable behaviour, what we don't have is consistent implementation of those guidelines, for the reasons pingtiao states. If you're not prepared to exercise any self control yourself, then your opinion carries zero weight when you make complaints.

I do not troll on these boards. I express my opinion forthrightly and somewhat abruptly due to the frat-house atmosphere, but my contributions are all genuine and reasoned.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 12 2008 14:20

http://libcom.org/user/337/track says otherwise.

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Feb 12 2008 15:08

Cyber-bullies?
Who on here is a cyber bully? I'd love to meet them.

Randy
Offline
Joined: 31-01-07
Feb 12 2008 15:36
pingtiao wrote:
...as most of the attention of the mods on here is directed towards the actually useful areas of the site, not much close modding gets done.

I think the mods were more groovy than the rockers, albeit by this point in time, a bit dated. Oh, i suppose now my opinion doesn't matter either?

In contrast to seemingly every one who comments on the subject, I have always liked the fact that people make jokes here. The hatefulness is offensive, but not the yuks (to me). I mean, where else can a geographically isolated communist take his or her (would be) humorous, obscure political references? Until recently I thought it was allowed, even encouraged. But obviously not.

Serious political discussions certainly have their place. Likely, serious discussion is more important than informal chat. (Also, I think serious discussion is more likely to succeed with a rather narrowly defined ideological focus.) But I think it would be good to have a space for each, for grave polemics, and for cut ups as well. So there it is, from the "for what it's worth" department.

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Feb 13 2008 16:07
Mike Harman wrote:
If you're not prepared to exercise any self control yourself, then your opinion carries zero weight when you make complaints.

But if you do excercise self-control. I did for a very long time, I made complaints and my opinion carried zero weight. I've gotten over the idea that libcom can be a positive tool for the development of anarchism in Britain and Ireland and accept it for what it is: a very good library and a forums where people just like me post, i.e. young white highly educated anarchist communist males from the cultural middle class who despise identity politics. A niche market but one I belong to.

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Feb 13 2008 17:25
Quote:
young white highly educated anarchist communist males from the cultural middle class

Yes, speak for your self.
Devrim

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 13 2008 17:28
georgestapleton wrote:
Mike Harman wrote:
If you're not prepared to exercise any self control yourself, then your opinion carries zero weight when you make complaints.

But if you do excercise self-control. I did for a very long time, I made complaints and my opinion carried zero weight.

Please point me to specific complaints that you've made which have been ignored. Thanks. We don't claim to be remotely good at moderating the forums - as already said, we don't have enough time and consider working on every other area of the site more important (i.e. better a good library and untended forums than the other way 'round - and at the moment it's a flat choice) - but we rarely blow people off unless they're indulging in the same sort of behaviour they complain about.

Quote:
I've gotten over the idea that libcom can be a positive tool for the development of anarchism in Britain and Ireland

I think at it's best, with no (inappropriate) pissing about on the forums, it still wouldn't be about this, not in those terms anyway.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Feb 13 2008 20:37

Libcom posts breakdown:

25% inappropriate and disruptive insults and shitslinging

25% inappropriate whinging from people who claim "never to post" but somehow surface regularly enough to whine about insults and shitslinging, regardless of the behaviour of members of the same organisation/clique/boyfriend on here

25% injokes, bored workplace-esque banter, memes, banal "ironic" reactionism...which from time to time translates into real world beef only for the protagonists to discover a certain insincere naivete as if they totally didn't realise the risks inherent in their behaviour

25% really educational/interesting/informative posts...which is presumably why the Whingers stick around, other than to remind us how little they post and why

As far as I can see, the people who do actually get fed up and leave aren't the precious newbies to anarchism, but more often than not seasoned activists upset at their arguments being debunked or not being deferred to cos of their quasi-celebrity status. Sure, a few people genuinely can't handle the environment, but I get the feeling most of the haters are merely pulling what from now on shall be called a Class War.

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Feb 13 2008 21:35
Mike Harman wrote:
georgestapleton wrote:
Mike Harman wrote:
If you're not prepared to exercise any self control yourself, then your opinion carries zero weight when you make complaints.

But if you do excercise self-control. I did for a very long time, I made complaints and my opinion carried zero weight.

Please point me to specific complaints that you've made which have been ignored. Thanks. We don't claim to be remotely good at moderating the forums - as already said, we don't have enough time and consider working on every other area of the site more important (i.e. better a good library and untended forums than the other way 'round - and at the moment it's a flat choice) - but we rarely blow people off unless they're indulging in the same sort of behaviour they complain about.

After the series of car crash threads after the bookfair in 2006. (I remember specifically awful ones that rose from RAG and I remember some with Dundee United that were also awful.) The were a number of threads in November and December 2006 where myself and a number of others said that the boards needed to be properly moderated and a number of people needed to be banned (specifically I think the ICC, Lazy Riser and Revol were mentioned). I don''t think I was blown off though, just that my opinions and the opinions others who had up to that point been extremely polite posters carried zero weight.

Quote:
Quote:
I've gotten over the idea that libcom can be a positive tool for the development of anarchism in Britain and Ireland

I think at it's best, with no (inappropriate) pissing about on the forums, it still wouldn't be about this, not in those terms anyway.

Yeah I'm still not sure what you lot think you are doing with the website even after having some very long chats and correspondence with some of you about it.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Feb 13 2008 23:25
Caiman del Barrio wrote:
Libcom posts breakdown:

20% inappropriate and disruptive insults and shitslinging

20% inappropriate whinging from people who claim "never to post" but somehow surface regularly enough to whine about insults and shitslinging, regardless of the behaviour of members of the same organisation/clique/boyfriend on here

20% injokes, bored workplace-esque banter, memes, banal "ironic" reactionism...which from time to time translates into real world beef only for the protagonists to discover a certain insincere naivete as if they totally didn't realise the risks inherent in their behaviour

20% really educational/interesting/informative posts...which is presumably why the Whingers stick around, other than to remind us how little they post and why

20% posts about me being in Mexico

Pretty much agree with Alan here.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 13 2008 23:40
Quote:
After the series of car crash threads after the bookfair in 2006. (I remember specifically awful ones that rose from RAG and I remember some with Dundee United that were also awful.)

OK well I don't think I read the RAG threads, and Dundee United has posted on many, many threads, some of which are awful so that doesn't help much. On that note, if you post in the actual thread where the spat is happening, there's a fair chance none of us will read it. Ideally, e-mail admin at libcom dot org.

I agree the boards need better moderating, I don't think there's an admin who doesn't. However even gurrier said it tends to be a lack of moderating rather than particularly bad moderating that's the problem, iyswim. If people would do stuff like, say, adopting an area for libcom news (Ireland is still going spare), then we'd have more time to do moderating. But as it is, I'd rather cover the overtime bans at Shannon and Dublin airports than intervene in what are normally 'he said she said' spats in the forums - especially when it's one or the other and no-one else is doing the former.

Revol has been banned several times, probably at least once since 2006. Lazy Riser was banned quite recently, and had a self-imposed period of quiet for some time after that. I don't remember many people seriously asking for the ICC to be banned to be honest, although I did ban their collective account wld_rvn shortly after they started posting. No permanent bans have been handed out to any of these, but the number of people we've permanently banned is exceptionally small, including people who only post on here to slag us off or advertise events.

Quote:
Yeah I'm still not sure what you lot think you are doing with the website even after having some very long chats and correspondence with some of you about it.

Well you haven't with me. Probably not for this thread though, but feel free to start a new one.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 13 2008 23:41
Jack wrote:
There's a difference between not agreeing with you and your opinions carrying zero weight, dude.

That also.

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Feb 14 2008 03:30
Mike Harman wrote:
I agree the boards need better moderating, I don't think there's an admin who doesn't. However even gurrier said it tends to be a lack of moderating rather than particularly bad moderating that's the problem, iyswim. If people would do stuff like, say, adopting an area for libcom news (Ireland is still going spare), then we'd have more time to do moderating. But as it is, I'd rather cover the overtime bans at Shannon and Dublin airports than intervene in what are normally 'he said she said' spats in the forums - especially when it's one or the other and no-one else is doing the former.

Yeah I'm not having a go. I know most of the admins don't seem to bother with the forums. And the news and library stuff is brilliant. So well done on that. Personally libcom isn't where I'd put my effort. It has a bad name & a low readership (when you exclude the forums). Internet wise I always mean to do more by which I mean write more for indymedia.ie, anarkismo.net and wsm.ie.

Quote:
Quote:
Yeah I'm still not sure what you lot think you are doing with the website even after having some very long chats and correspondence with some of you about it.

Well you haven't with me. Probably not for this thread though, but feel free to start a new one.

Yeah when I say some really I mean Steven and Jack. I've also raised it on the forums a few times and had pub conversations with pingtao, gav and possibly Ed about it when I've seen them IRL. Or maybe I haven't - I can't really remember the conversations I just have a feeling I've had them.

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Feb 14 2008 03:42
Quote:
Jack wrote:
There's a difference between not agreeing with you and your opinions carrying zero weight, dude.

That also.

Just to point out that this cannot possible be true because if my opinions carried weight then that would mean that you'd think about them. And if you thought about my opinions you'd realise they were right. Because they are, my opinions are always right.

A perfectly logical argument. In fact I could put explain it to you in terms of propositional calculus if you'd like.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 14 2008 10:01
georgestapleton wrote:
Personally libcom isn't where I'd put my effort. It has a bad name & a low readership (when you exclude the forums).

Well libcom has a bad name with a reasonable number of UK anarchists, and a few more internationally. However anarchists aren't our target audience by any means. Others hold us in fairly high regard, and even people who really despise us use the library and news. To be honest I find it hard to get excited about this 'bad name', especially given the quarters that much of it comes from (c.f. infoshop discussion linked above).

In terms of readership, of 120,000 visitors per month, about 500 log in. So in terms of readership, the vast majority of traffic is outside the forums - although the vast majority of those people are generally only looking at a couple of pages at a time - they're generally random people looking for very specific information about current or historical events - imo. that's a good thing. It'd be nice to have their attention for a bit longer and we're going to be spending the next year working on that. But reaching that number of people with the minimal resources we have is alright.

Probably best here though rather than spamming this thread.

Quote:
Yeah I'm still not sure what you lot think you are doing with the website .

What exactly aren't you sure about? I don't get out to the pub as much as I'd like sad

Carousel
Offline
Joined: 19-09-07
Feb 14 2008 10:03
Quote:
comedy trolls like carousel troll the boards

Uncalled for. My contributions are genuine, reasoned and civil. It does intrigue me though, on what grounds anything I post could be construed as “trolling”. It’s a stupid meaningless word anyway, like “issues”. It says more about the personality of the complainants, clustered around an anarchist internet forum, than it does about the alleged perpetrator.

syndicalist
Offline
Joined: 15-04-06
Feb 14 2008 13:10

I think both boards serve different but complimentary purposes.

The problem which I've had with libcom is some of the posters. I think they just get out of hand with their ripping apart people in very foul ways. Don't get me wrong, I'm for principled differences and discussing them, but sometimes a small core of libcom posters get downright nasty and personal. That's a turn-off.

A= an anarchist, sometimes the squatting of ICC-types can be annoying. Sort of like they're waiting in the weeds to look for a chance to rip anarchism. At least they are civil in their discussions and, sometimes, have some keen things to say.

So keep on keeping on libcom folks.

georgestapleton's picture
georgestapleton
Offline
Joined: 4-08-05
Feb 14 2008 17:41
Mike Harman wrote:
georgestapleton wrote:
Personally libcom isn't where I'd put my effort. It has a bad name & a low readership (when you exclude the forums).

Well libcom has a bad name with a reasonable number of UK anarchists, and a few more internationally. However anarchists aren't our target audience by any means. Others hold us in fairly high regard, and even people who really despise us use the library and news. To be honest I find it hard to get excited about this 'bad name', especially given the quarters that much of it comes from (c.f. infoshop discussion linked above).

In terms of readership, of 120,000 visitors per month, about 500 log in. So in terms of readership, the vast majority of traffic is outside the forums - although the vast majority of those people are generally only looking at a couple of pages at a time - they're generally random people looking for very specific information about current or historical events - imo. that's a good thing. It'd be nice to have their attention for a bit longer and we're going to be spending the next year working on that. But reaching that number of people with the minimal resources we have is alright.

Yeah I'm not having a go and I'd leave this if it was confrontational. So just to be clear I'm only saying this because its my experience, obviously you out a lot of work into the site and you might like to hear my experiences.

Firstly, on the bad name. It has a bad name far outside the lifestylist scene. Most WSMers, SFer, AFers, HSGers, LCAPers, NEFACers, CommonCauseers, FdCAers, ZACFers SPers, ISNers, RAGsters I know who are aware of the site think its awful (despite the library). None of these people are lifestylists. Even with the library I've found my self sending emails linked to texts and deliberately using different websites to libcom because I think libcom is embarassing. I'm embarassed to tell most solid class struggle anarchists that I post on libcom cos their opinion of it is so low.

On visits: I was looking at the stats for libcom.org and anarkismo.net and when you subtract the stats for libcom.org/forums from the total libcom stats it comes out about even. I think thats shocking. I hardly ever look at anarkismo and I'm in the one of organisations that launched it. In fact very few people in the WSM look at anarkismo. Looking at your stats I've been amazed at how bad they are. For comparison indymedia.ie got 2,536,565 visits last month, over twenty times what you are getting, and that is a below average month. link Again, I'm in an org that was involved in launching indymedia, and that has 3 or 4 editors on indymedia and I normally only check it 3 or 4 times a week. While I might check libcom 20 times a week.

Quote:
Probably best here though rather than spamming this thread.
Quote:
Yeah I'm still not sure what you lot think you are doing with the website .

What exactly aren't you sure about? I don't get out to the pub as much as I'd like :(

I probably get out to the pub too much. embarrassed

Basically, I'm not sure why you are devoting so much effort to the site. What do you think it can achieve? What kind of revolutionary movement do you want to see and how do you see libcom as aiding in its creation?

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Feb 14 2008 17:51

In fairness, Libcom's remit is a much more specific than that of Indymedia so it's far from shocking that it has higher visit stats. Libcom's oriented clearly toward class-struggle anarchism while Indymedia's remit as I understand it is more of well, what it says on the tin, a general independent media source but more catch-all in terms of politics. So really those figures aren't much use at all and don't say anything.
It'd be like comparing Indymedia to the BBC site.

Carousel
Offline
Joined: 19-09-07
Feb 14 2008 18:45
Quote:
I'm embarassed to tell most solid class struggle anarchists that I post on libcom cos their opinion of it is so low.

Tell me about it. Internet forums are even gayer than MySpace.

jack white
Offline
Joined: 7-04-05
Feb 14 2008 19:48

Two quick points.

georgestapleton wrote:

In fact very few people in the WSM look at anarkismo.

I think you're totally mistaken on this.

georgestapleton wrote:
... Again, I'm in an org that was involved in launching indymedia, and that has 3 or 4 editors on indymedia and I normally only check it 3 or 4 times a week. While I might check libcom 20 times a week.

WSM wasn't involved in launching indymedia. In fact it wasn't launched by any organisations. I think Joe Black and Ray C. might have been at the original meetings but thats it. (I wasn't a member of the WSM back then). That said there have always been at least a couple of members active within it.

Rob Ray's picture
Rob Ray
Offline
Joined: 6-11-03
Feb 14 2008 20:31
Quote:
Most WSMers, SFer, AFers, HSGers, LCAPers, NEFACers, CommonCauseers, FdCAers, ZACFers SPers, ISNers, RAGsters I know who are aware of the site think its awful (despite the library).

Tbh my experience is that most people think the site is pretty good, other than the forums which yeah do have a bad reputation. Though having said that, tbh I think a lot of that bad reputation is undeserved and more a product of arsey twats spreading shit because they got mauled in a debate than it is down to the actual level of debate, there's loads of people I've spoken to who say "oh yeah libcom's full of wankers" when it turns out they've never read it and got that impression solely from shit slinging on indymedia or rumour-mongering from other people.

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 14 2008 21:27
georgestapleton wrote:
Firstly, on the bad name. It has a bad name far outside the lifestylist scene. Most WSMers, SFer, AFers, HSGers, LCAPers, NEFACers, CommonCauseers, FdCAers, ZACFers SPers, ISNers, RAGsters I know who are aware of the site think its awful (despite the library).

Well half that list is anarkismo-statement-esque platformists who we've had long-running disagreements with, and then half the libcom admins are in solfed which is contradictory at best. I also know people in HSG, LCAP who've got a decent opinion of the site (if not the forums), and several AF members post here regularly and contribute content.

But again, I'm not interested in making the site appealing to members of anarchist groups of any stripe (Personal Capacity wink ) - if they like it, great, but the thing that pisses me off most about anarcho sites is how so much of the content is geared towards anarchists.

Quote:
Even with the library I've found my self sending emails linked to texts and deliberately using different websites to libcom because I think libcom is embarassing. I'm embarassed to tell most solid class struggle anarchists that I post on libcom cos their opinion of it is so low.

awww.

Quote:
On visits: I was looking at the stats for libcom.org and anarkismo.net and when you subtract the stats for libcom.org/forums from the total libcom stats it comes out about even. I think thats shocking. I hardly ever look at anarkismo and I'm in the one of organisations that launched it. In fact very few people in the WSM look at anarkismo.

To be honest I'm not sure exactly how anarkismo work out their stats - gurrier indicated it was based on ISP billing since they don't keep logs - whereas ours are done by awstats via apache logs (and specifically exclude bots and the rest).So it's not really comparing like with like at the moment (not that like with like might not be the same, but we don't know if it is or not).

Quote:
Looking at your stats I've been amazed at how bad they are. For comparison indymedia.ie got 2,536,565 visits last month, over twenty times what you are getting, and that is a below average month. link Again, I'm in an org that was involved in launching indymedia, and that has 3 or 4 editors on indymedia and I normally only check it 3 or 4 times a week. While I might check libcom 20 times a week.

Actually that doesn't surprise me at all. indymedia is an international (and well known) network with aggregation around the regional sites and indymedia.org itself, and as mentioned, it appeals to a far wider spectrum of people (or is supposed to anyway). Also if you look at page views, although they get 20 times as many visits, they get about 3 times our page views - works out about 1.1 pages per visit - so it's almost 100% 'look at one page and leave' traffic. If you look at January's traffic, they primarily get traffic from rss/atom feeds along with direct referrals to the front page - which would support the idea that a lot of it is coming from other indymedia sites.

More to the point, if the WSM has 3-4 editors in the indymedia collective, how come the only two features this year are a poem reading at Shannon airport and something about anti-war banner droppers at Shannon getting harrassed? This while there's flights cancelled every evening due to strike action at the very same airport, no matter what else might be going on elsewhere. Not to mention nothing about it on the WSM.ie or anarkismo sites either. To be honest I don't care how many people look at indymedia.ie with content like that (and yes I know there's been one or two decent articles here and there, but the same can be said for almost any news source).

Quote:
Basically, I'm not sure why you are devoting so much effort to the site.

Well I have the same question for just about every member of every existing political group. Personally, I really like building websites, it's fun. I find political meetings less fun, in general, to put it mildly. Also it's pretty clear that if we weren't covering the stuff that we do (particularly the news coverage and much of the ultra-left and historical information in the library), then pretty much no-one else would - certainly not on any scale.

As to how I see libcom helping a 'revolutionary movement', well that's not exactly a small question. One example of how it's had some practical application was refuse workers on strike in Tottenham finding, printing and handing out the articles on the Brighton 2001 bin strike at their picket line a year or so ago (to pick something topical) - found via google. We almost didn't hear about that - was only via a non-poster who visited the picket line. If there's an increase in open class conflict then I think we'd see many more examples of this occurring, and I think it has some relevance, albeit very minor. Not to harp on about it but the CPE was pretty positive as well. Dispatch had (mostly untapped) potential. Otherwise I think the premises of the question are mostly arse backwards.

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Feb 14 2008 21:30

I only ever look at the forums. I'm a bad man. sad

AndrewF's picture
AndrewF
Offline
Joined: 28-02-05
Feb 14 2008 21:57
Mike Harman wrote:
More to the point, if the WSM has 3-4 editors in the indymedia collective,

I don't think this is actually the case but I could be wrong, in any case the editors decide which content to promote rather than what should be written. I'm pretty sure an article by a worker at the airport on the situation would be featured.

Mike Harman wrote:
This while there's flights cancelled every evening due to strike action at the very same airport, no matter what else might be going on elsewhere. Not to mention nothing about it on the WSM.ie or anarkismo sites either. T

This is more substantial.

To be honest I'm very unconvinced by most libcom coverage in this area because it looks a lot like someone has put 'wildcat strike' into google news alerts and then assembles an article from mainstream sources on each one. I genuinely don't get what that is meant to achieve outside of two things
a. The hope to attract visitors to the site who google such stories
b. Having a collection of such stories in the same place.

A. has very little value (except to libcom in terms of traffic) as these stories just rewrite what someone would have found anyway. B. has some value but not a lot.

Articles written for the WSM site cover stuff that WSM members have a direct or indirect involvement in. As such they contain information not already available. They are only likely to cover a wildcat if WSM members are involved in some way. Not having any members in or connected with the airports that coverage is absent outside of cases were someone is assigned to write an analytical article about such events.

jack white
Offline
Joined: 7-04-05
Feb 14 2008 22:25
JoeBlack2 wrote:
Mike Harman wrote:
More to the point, if the WSM has 3-4 editors in the indymedia collective,

I don't think this is actually the case but I could be wrong, in any case the editors decide which content to promote rather than what should be written. I'm pretty sure an article by a worker at the airport on the situation would be featured.

There are currently 4 members of WSM with some sort of editorial status on indymedia.ie (different functions on the website / lists are assaigned to different types of 'editors', the term is misleading, its nothing like a newspaper editor or whatever). Some of those wouldn't be massively active. But apart from that Joeblack is pretty much on the ball. Indymedia in Ireland is possibly a bit different to a lot of other places in that the collective mostly just look after running the site - moderating the newswire (which is most of what I do for example), featurising stories submitted by others to the newswire etc etc. Other wsmers involved are also newswire editors, run the email lists, develop Oscailt or are working on a torrent thingy I don't really understand.

I'm going off topic now but the biggest success Indymedia.ie has had is creating an accessible site for people to post their news / views to and for large numbers of people to read it. The biggest problem indymedia.ie has is getting decent content. Most of the editors don't submit very much as their time for the site is spent elsewhere (so i'd be a bit sympathetic to the decision Libcom have taken re not moderating the forums - mind you I think this really lowers their quality).

john
Offline
Joined: 9-07-06
Feb 14 2008 22:44

I think the forums are ok - actually, they're quite interesting and even sometimes fun!

Mike Harman
Offline
Joined: 7-02-06
Feb 14 2008 22:45
JoeBlack2 wrote:
Mike Harman wrote:
More to the point, if the WSM has 3-4 editors in the indymedia collective,

I don't think this is actually the case but I could be wrong, in any case the editors decide which content to promote rather than what should be written. I'm pretty sure an article by a worker at the airport on the situation would be featured.

Editors are capable of writing articles right? I seem to remember a WSM member a few months ago arguing how indymedia gets big audiences for WSM articles and 'influence' that they wouldn't get if they didn't have people involved etc. etc. - I don't see that influence.

Quote:
This is more substantial.

To be honest I'm very unconvinced by most libcom coverage in this area because it looks a lot like someone has put 'wildcat strike' into google news alerts and then assembles an article from mainstream sources on each one.

How did you guess?? tongue
More seriously, yes a lot of day-to-day coverage is like that - we're not involved in strikes ourselves on a daily basis unfortunately. However we do have interviews, people report stuff they're directly involved with - but when there isn't stuff like that it's better than lock-ons.

Quote:
I genuinely don't get what that is meant to achieve outside of two things
a. The hope to attract visitors to the site who google such stories
b. Having a collection of such stories in the same place.

A. has very little value (except to libcom in terms of traffic) as these stories just rewrite what someone would have found anyway.

Well we had a situation where we did a three sentence article about a strike at a power station then got two picket line updates a week for six weeks from one of the strikers after he found it due to googling. It's not without merit although obviously that's a tiny fraction of articles.

b. is obviously what we'd consider more important. It'll have more value when the site is actually navigable.

Quote:
Articles written for the WSM site cover stuff that WSM members have a direct or indirect involvement in. As such they contain information not already available. They are only likely to cover a wildcat if WSM members are involved in some way. Not having any members in or connected with the airports that coverage is absent outside of cases were someone is assigned to write an analytical article about such events.

Well that's good to an extent, but you know I disagree with a lot of what the WSM gets involved with - I concentrate on what I think is worthwhile, even if a lot of it is quite remote, and then try to build links between that worthwhile stuff where possible, rather than get involved in things simply to get involved.