Some interesting developments.

It seems that the admin list that everybody is refered to

 http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features/

is not an open list. Any requests, information, comments etc must first be approved by one of the inner admin circle before it is released to the full list readership. Another level of restriction designed to prevent debate and hide the decision making. Not unsurprising my request to become an admin was not approved for release and so the wider Indymedia community are not allowed to see it and the questions it raises.

This again leads us back to the original point I was making, how does somebody become an admin ?

"It seems that admins are appointed without any form of democratic accountability"

No and yes. They're not appointed, they join the collective and, it being a non-heirarchical organisation "democratic accountability" is not really an issue. Taking responsibility for one's decisions and being prepared to defend and argue them is.

"they do not have to be elected, their period of power is for a long as they want and the selection procedure seems to be that they are chosen by the current admins".

This is not a government nor a local council, "period of power" is a nonsense and there is no selection process. However if you become an admin and your "editorial decisions" - as you might judge them - consistently cause conflict you might decide you're not suitable for the task.

"A not a satisfactory arrangement I am sure everyone would agree".

Well I wouldn't agree, no.

"...there is a very serious problem with the direction Indymedia is being taken by one individual. "

There seem to be a number of attacks on different issues via the editorial list
 http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features
at the moment.

Want to 'fess up to which particular gripe with imc you're allied to?

"I have written and emailed the collective and have informed them I wish to become an admin."

Well done "Mike". I've just quickly scanned the list to find your post. What non-de-plume are you using for this request?

I have just seen that one of my comments has been hidden. I am a regular contributor to IMC with reports and comments, covering Climate Camp/Action reports, No Border reports and more, and I don't think anything I've contributed has ever been hidden until now.

I fully appreciate the work that IMC admins do and that it is a thankless task! However, my hidden comment simply revealed my unesase at offering a platform for Griffin and Irvin, and stated my concern that a simplistic view of capitalist power relations made it all too likely that for indymedia articles to look for some Jewish conspiracy network - and yes this is one very important element of modern anti-Semitism!!!

Hope this won't be hidden.

Mike, you could be a Mossad plant or CIA vegetable, a an unusual type of nutter, an anti-Palestinian racist.
.
So Mike, I would say that you have to do your time first, and when people get to trust you, they might give you the keys to the treasure and your hearts desire.

In fact, I think you have started your campaign to become an “IM admin” badly. What also worries are your views, such as: "From my position I can't see a lot of difference between Nick Griffin's offensive views and Gilda Atzmon's offensive views - Why can't IMC admins."
What´s your poition Mike, pro- Israeli foreign policy?

Mike Nick Griffin is a leader of a Fascist political party. Mike Fascists, when they can get away with it, murder Jews, trade union members, black people, and people with disabilities and so on.... A platform encourages them, and those that give it to would also be responsible if another fascist holocaust were to occur again as a result. . Do you not see that Mike.

I belive liberals (`robably like you Mike) would choose the facist over the socialist, because they know the facist would take good care of them and take look after capitalism.

Gilad is not a fascist Mike.

"Gilad is not a fascist Mike. "

No, he is just a useful idiot for people fascists.