[syndicate] Re: Yes, but is it art?
self re:ply.cator
netwurker at hotkey.net.au
Tue Mar 12 08:00:22 CET 2002
At 07:20 PM 3/11/2002 -0800, m wrote:
>i agree with the definition of spam as unsolicted _commercial_ email so i am
>not a spammer if i send poetry to ppl who i don't know. i have been
>experimenting with making up email names (luvyou, hotguy, etc...) and
>appending @yahoo.com and @hotmail.com. then i send them a message of love
>and invite them to send me one back. surprising.
i bet:)
>yes, the net is beautiful and the possibilities are largely unexplored.
>there is so much data that many ppl choose an editor (list moderator) and
>trust he/she will keep them supplied with data that pleases them. the
>classification of your writing as OFF-TOPIC (what the hell is that anyway?
>-- whatever the moderator says it is) hurts you and that is understandable
>since the list you were banned from is supposedly about "...artistic
>practice and theory".
..the thing that surprised me regarding the ::fibreculture:: fiasco is that
i had been specifically careful with the ::fc:: list, in that when they
had initially informed me that my code.wurk wasn't welcome|appropriate list
content, i stopped sending it m_m.mediately_........ after the ::recode::
d.bacle [where i was banned from posting by a moderator who had previously
championed|welcomed my wurks on list as well as curating selections of them
4 dispersal via print media] i ][w][a][s][m trying 2 regulate my
communication pulses so as 2 minimize overt perceived disruption according
2 niche definitives......after this i *had* been sending posts [not
cod][n][e][t][.wurks] 2 ::fc:: that actually n.gaged issues onlist within
their man.][out][dated correspondence dialogue template.......
howeva, 1 of the so-called _facilitators_ either hadn't bothered to
actually read them or judged them disruptive 4 some other reason [possibly
stylistic variation] as it resulted in this particular facilitator [Hugh
Brown] removing me from the lists 3 times over a 5 months span....i assumed
something was up my end [my ISP is a tad shonky] so kept resubbing as i had
no correspondence from any of the moderators| facilitators regarding
this...it was only after i mailed the facs privately that i had been having
trouble with my subscription that they d.cided 2 tell me that they had been
repeatedly banning me after each ][re][subscription without my knowledge or
any attempt 2 inform me of such action........
just 4 the ][factual][ record, the ::fc:: faciliators have d.cided to allow
me 2 post within [even more] stringent guidelines.....i'm no longer
n.terested in posting, as the _community_ is now e.][in][fect.ively locked
down in2 a smothering intercourse diorama that allows 4 very little
variation from the preferred mandated correspondence style ][in terms of
style or patterns of discourse|insight][...........
also, i wasn't actually banned from the resistant media list, list
participants where _advised_ not 2 discuss the lack of new media funding in
australia due 2 sever.al funders' presence on the lists itself........
>the world is full of small-minded ppl. attributing to
>you the "deterioration of the culture of the list" is total bullshit because
>ppl can filter you. if ppl don't know how to do this then it would be
>trivial to post instructions.
yr correct here, wot was particularly galling was the complete
underhandedness with which the repeated banning took place, and the abusive
glee with which the a4mentioned _faciliator_ e.ventually bothered 2 n.form
me of the repeated bannings......i had even sent test messages 2 the list
after 2tempting 2 resub which they must have seen, then banned me without
thought of informing me or @tempt 2 create any type of communication lead
via which 2 resolve the s.sues they had with my postings....without any
disclosure or attempt 2 rectify the situation......i'd say this contributed
2 the "deterioration of the culture of the list" s.pecially as the list is
promoted as b.ing _unmoderated_ & open 2 various modes of discussion.......
this is their blurb:
:: f i b r e c u l t u r e :: IS COMMITTED TO...
the building of a public info-structure /
digital publics / critical publics,
and the widening and deepening of public
space, and public discourse
(on-line and off-)
by fostering and promoting open,
independent, critical, participatory
and sustainable forums; and an Australian
list-culture that values
these attributes
..i ][still][ find this n.tensely hypocritical..........
>i view cross-posting as the posters' view of a community of communities.
>that some readers have the same view of this meta-community and thus recieve
>the same post multi-times is not a concern of the poster. again filters exist.
...yes.
>i don't filter because i like serendipity.
agreed.
>even spam is sometimes amusing.
yup n.deedy.
>even trolls can be amusing (which you certainly are not)
;0) yes, they can b.
[& no, i'm not 1, though many consider me 2 fit-the-troll-bill].........
>the coder in me likes mezangelle. it makes visible in a pleasing way the
>surprising synergy/overlap between words and meaning. mezangelle is a
>message in itself, but i was refering to additional message of the content
>of your writing.
..right.........
>surely you see that as the more important component?
..i don't like 2 segregate components in2 importance lvls, as
n.terpretations & meaning absorption can b so tangential & can b accessed
via so many ][re][s.ou][t][rces}layerings.......
>i
>think we both see the net as a data sea but i recognize the existence of
>data islands where my message is not appropriate (and i think you do to).
possibly.........
>michael
>
>i look in the mirror and am happy to see all my wrinkles are smile wrinkles
this is the best snippet i've absorbed all day:)
chunks,
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
.... . .??? .......
More information about the Syndicate
mailing list