[matilda] popstars and free party sound systems

[atw]

cuthbert> On the issue of richard hauley, we would only get a donation
cuthbert> if he sold his film onto MTV or whoever and even then the
cuthbert> donation has not been specified.

Could that not have been discussed and agreed at the meeting? Say
Matilda gets XX% of the net profits?



cuthbert> Further by making this proposal on  the night without the 7
cuthbert> day waiting period you havent given us a chance to properly
cuthbert> discuss it, let alone for anyone who happened to not be at
cuthbert> that meeting to turn up to the next meeting and let their
cuthbert> voice be heard.

I didn't know this was a requirement. Lots of things have been
proposed in the past simply at meetings. If this is a new requirement
then as far as I'm concerned it sucks. We seem to be very good at
creating increasing bureaucracy - a poor show when something like half the folk
at Matilda are supposed to be anarchists.






cuthbert> If you want to compare the two proposals further then i could mention the
cuthbert> number of hours people put into the building to make the building far
cuthbert> safer than when we started with it.  Apparently richard hauley's people
cuthbert> have offered a two day film making workshop or somthing but this
cuthbert> information is all second or third hand from 0742 so i dont how much of it
cuthbert> was 0742 being willing to bend the truth to get our agreement to his
cuthbert> proposal.


According to 0742 Eve Wood was there. Why couldn't she verify the
offer?



cuthbert> My request to 0742 is that if he doesnt accept our decision
cuthbert> making proccess to go and join the SWP where he can get
cuthbert> away with bullying people into agreeing with him.


I think he's already been kicked out.

However personally I don't think the decision making process is great
at all. According the minutes from last night the reason this was not
passed was because "Issues were raised about people profiting from
using the space."

According to the poll about profits at Matilda in which 46 people
replied (far more than the average Monday meeting) over half said they
didn't have a problem with people making money at Matilda.

That's not consensus. It's minority rule.

Also if 0742 is correct in the claim that NTA made £400 from the Dec
gig then I think it's perfectly fair to say its hypocritical that this
was not passed because of "issues about people profiting".

Finally I don't quite get the paranoia about talking about money. As
long as its whereabouts are not disclosed I don't see how anyone would
even think about trying to rob it. And it's only a few hundred quid
after all (isn't it?). Do people honestly think that Sheffield's
Gangster's are trawling through this email list to find out how much
money we have? Unless there's some evidence to support such beliefs
then as far as I'm concerned that is delusional thinking.

All the Sheffield Indymedia accounts are discussed on our open email
list and are also posted on the web and have been for years yet we've
never had any problems. Simply type Sheffield Indymedia Bank account
into Google and you'll find this page...

http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Local/ImcSheffieldBankAccount

Anyone in the world can view our accounts if they want to. No big deal
at all. No one is interested.

With Matilda I have no idea of how much we have and actually I never
have had more than an occasional sketchy guesstimate of what we've
got, what its been spent on and what we owe. It never even gets
brought up in Monday meetings. Such secretiveness is completely
disempowering for those who don't know and creates an elite of those
who do know. It's a shite way of doing things and should be changed
immediately.

Happy New Year everyone (apart from the fact ketamine is now illegal)!

steve





-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.15/223 - Release Date: 06/01/2006