Nottingham Indymedia has always strived to provide anonymous publishing. In the corporate dominated world of the internet, collecting information on site users is the norm. We think that Indymedia should allow users to decide how much information they reveal about themselves rather than storing data on site users. Due to the controversy generated by the publication of details about monitoring IP addresses and posts from Gateway 303, we think it is necessary to produce this statement of our view of events.

Monitoring IP addresses, Gateway 303 and the fork in the UK network

Our collective was formed in 2005, after the UK Indymedia site migrated to the Mir content management system in 2003. We had no part in setting up Mir or making technical decisions about the way it operated. Whilst a number of our collective had administrative access to Mir we never used its anti-abuse measures and we were not informed about their existence when we joined the UK network.

In 2009, one of our collective came across articles and comments flagged as having come from Gateway 303 and asked Mir techs about what was going on. Those asked were open about the filters that were in place to identify such posts and hoped that the suspected police posting would be exposed some time in the future. This wish was raised formally at the UK Network meeting in Bristol in 2010. It was the subject of considerable controversy with strong views both for and against publishing.

Nottingham Indymedia have always taken the position that there are two separate issues at stake: whether or not to publish the information and whether use of the anti-abuse measures is appropriate. On the first we were quite clear: We took the position that Indymedia admins had a responsibility to share the information they had collected with the wider activist community. To fail to disclose the strategies of systematic disruption, smearing and incitement that had been connected to one particular government gateway would have been to fail the very people who rely on Indymedia. We supported the proposal to publish the information.

The issue of monitoring IPs is separate. We are not convinced that enabling admins to monitor or flag IP addresses are appropriate things for an IMC to do, given the potential security risks. We think that the only appropriate way to remove disruptive, smearing and inciteful posts is through assessing each post on its own merits. Using human, rather than machine intelligence is the only sensible way to moderate an Indymedia site. We think that drawing on the knowledge of the activist networks that we are connected with is the best way to prevent the kind of state manipulation that the Gateway 303 posts represent. Nottingham Indymedia does not monitor IP addresses but we do check every post that is made to our site and confer with connected activists when we are in doubt.

The controversy over the Gateway 303 feature is an example of an increasingly frequent situation that has arisen within the UK Network over the past few years: a lack of consensus that has resulted in inaction. In order to give people with different positions the autonomy to continue with their own projects, a decision was made at a UK Network meeting at the end of last year, to dissolve the UK Network. We think this was the right decision and we hope to see good things emerging from independent projects that emerge. Nottingham Indymedia will continue to work with other local IMCs and independent media projects when it is appropriate. We think that Indymedia in the UK is as relevant as ever and we're looking forward to coming insurrections!