[syndicate] Re: get well

[self re:ply.cator]

At 03:23 PM 3/10/2002 +0100, you wrote:

>f. is not my name it is my signature
>which I use only in public conversations

right. so even though this iconic reference to 'f" can be traced 2 u as an 
self-defined individual in terms of mailing list participation, this isn't 
][identity][ advertising....??


>>1. hows is yr communication attempt above beneficial 2 the syndicate 
>>community? wot n.sights/threaded information/coherent communication 
>>sparked does it n.gender?
>
>it is the continuation of a thread which begins with my use of the ecard 
>functionality of the fetish club web site. I know that Claudia (who 
>approved the mail that came from an unsubscribed adress) objected to the 
>use of that service and she said so in a mail to which this was an answer. 
>the real question behind that was "why do you use this porn company to 
>spam the list ?" but this was not expressed as such so I did not reply to 
>that. instead I remained elliptic simply because I do not believe that I 
>have to explain everything that I do; after all, I am not an artist.

heh. so u n.gaged in a multilogue on this mailing list by offering 
opinionated/anecdotal evidence...
how is _this_ method of response|communication _any more valid_ than 
posting an article regarding similar opinionated/anecdotal evidence?

.methods. of. co.n][et][nection. vary.

>still, I have used part of the announcement that seemed to upset claudia 
>and rearranged it in a way that highlights its positive aspects
>(gosh!)

..so yr act of rearrangement of info makes this type of 
personal-correspondance-m.ulation acceptable in terms of n.hancing the 
syndicate community, whereas the cross-posted of info that doesn't con.form 
2 this does not?

>>2.how is this post  _not_ perpetuating the cult of the frederic madre 
>>self by signing yr icon "f." representative of yr name & hence identity?
>
>this is not the point I was making in my initial post...

fair enuff, i understand.
howeva, c-ing that list forums can act as vehicles 4 threads
that often split & rhizome out from the initial starting points, i'm 
n.terested 2 x.change communication regarding this......& also clarifying 
wot yr initial post was stating, largely by asking u questions regarding 
n.consistencies that i perceive in relation 2 yr reasoning-bases.

is. this. ok.?

>to some extent, every mail we send is self promotion unless it is 
>genuinely rooted in a, hey, community and its style and language and 
>trivia and stories and internal fiction

..and u perceive that by cross-posting info i perform an action that 
weakens the community - its style and language and trivia and stories and 
internal fiction?

wot r. syndicates' style and language and trivia and stories and internal 
fiction?



>>[c how silly this all is....
>
>I don't find any of this silly, otherwise I would disengage


yes, yr right, i shouldn't have used the term silly. i was presupposing| 
making assumptions [ie that u adhered 2 certain opinions|perceptions 
regarding the net.work that u actually don't].

>>when a monogaze is only m.ployed in terms of meaning that can b x.tracted 
>>via a network?]
>
>please explain this phrase, I do not understand it

i was referring 2 the notion that i c u as employing a monogaze, a 
perceptual slant that hi-lites the net.work as a series of interconnected 
set of difference-loadings, of x.clusive infopackets that can][should][not 
be transferred nor cross-posted in order that multiple x.posure 2 
information|data will not occur 4 various individual enities that n.habit 
various sets....rather than n.corporating a more holistic viewpoint of the 
network & acting along an n.clusion axis......

i c this monogaze as n.dicative of an ego-driven [by ego i mean 
self-cogitation, not ego as in inflated] awareness that perceives the 
break-points of an netsystem via individual opinions based on an awareness 
that may not be replicated via the community population. i also view it as 
perpetuating a theory structure that relies on a linear interpretation of 
information, 1 that cuts of any repetitive nuancing in order that data is 
presented in accordance with a determinist POV.

i.c.that.we.should.revel.in.this.cross-pollination.activity.


pollinatory,
mez




.           .    ....         .....
  net.wurker][mez][
[trans. loose. (e)NT][ity][]
[sel][l][f  reply.cation]

{

www.cddc.vt.edu/host/netwurker/
  www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
.... .               .???  .......