[Nettime-bold] FW:>*Net.art As Typographical Response: Recoding APerformative Net.Action*

["Phonet][r][ix" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>]

][this extract is 4m an upcoming article in 
_Net.Artivism_, Vol iii., Issue 4 (April 01)). 
the author has given permission 2 [partially] reprint][




>____________________________________________________________________
>
>*Net.art As Typographical Response: Recoding A Performative Net.Action*
>
>
>-M.T. Markoff
>
>
>
>On March 30, 2001, the artist called "FTR" (Free The Radical) performed a
net.artivist action that would make the most moderate of email list
moderators stew in their static. FTR performed an artistic intervention
that endeavored to unsubscribe the *recode* list moderator (Julianne
Pierce, Executive Director of the Australian Network for Art and Technology
and a co-founding member of VNS Matrix) from the *recode* list itself. 
>
>FTR engineered this typical example of net.artivism (and corresponding
mail response _Majordomo results: gameplay_) in response to Pierce's
removal of mez (Mary-Anne Breeze) from the Australian new media email list
*recode*. mez is an internationally renowned internet artist who posts to
many  rt-oriented email lists in order to construct her "net.wurk
performance texts" which often incorporate "spontaneous collaboration
segments" resulting from this "open-source performance and dispersal
method" and production (Breeze, 31/3/01). Pierce carried out the removal
after concluding that mez's latest collaborative and interactively
constructed work, _[Col][Lab [C]Logging: Agency of The N][arratively
fractured][etwurk_ (http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/colablog1.htm),was
inherently "spam" - a type of unsoliticed and commercially-driven email -
which therefore violated the nature of the list dynamics (that "nature"
being defined as discussion focusing on new media art, rather than
functioning as a forum for experimentation or art construction). 
>
>Mez's *recode* removal was made without any attempt to consult or
correspond with her (or indeed any of the contributing authors) directly,
or with the current members of the *recode* list. This (surprisingly) runs
contrary to Pierce's previously stated opinions and moderator decisions
regarding mez's work, and its right to be displayed via the recode mailing
list. Pierce has previously stated:
>
>	"Even though the (recode) list has been set up for discussion 
	and information, I think that it is fairly open about 
	what can be posted. There is no moderation of the list, 
	I act as an administrator, and do not filter out any 
	postings. I can understand that mez()'s postings might 
	seem out of place on the list, but I would not like to 
	unsubscribe them, as I think that their work reacts 
	and responds to all sorts of traffic on the net.
	Even though it is some sort of data stream of 
	consciousness, it seems to 	me an attempt to interpret 
	data flows, code, digits etc. The one thing that is 
	pretty annoying though, is that it is cross-posted 
	across a whole lot of lists. So in fact, the work is 
	not responding to the what 	goes on at :::recode:::, 
	rather it is a general burst of mez() across the net."
	[Julianne Pierce, *recode*, 20/4/00]



<rangy description of open source art/nodal distribution models snipped>


>>As a result of Pierce's unsubscription/resubscription action, mez will no
longer be including *recode* in her open source art and nodal distribution
model, and views Pierce's actions are a decisive blow to this (and other)
methods of net.art copyleftist action, production and dispersal.






.           .    ....         .....
    net.wurk][.Phonet][r][ix][ 
          n.sert no here xXXx             
                   +               
    www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker
.... .                  .???  .......


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold