www.nettime.org
Nettime mailing list archives

<nettime> r h i z o m e dgst [x5]
nettime's_fickle_customer on Thu, 23 Jan 2003 06:32:34 +0100 (CET)


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> r h i z o m e dgst [x5]


Re: <nettime> r h  i   z    o     m      e   digest <...>
     "Brice Bowman" <brice {AT} bricebowman.com>
     "Patrick Lichty" <voyd {AT} voyd.com>
<nettime> rhizome or <rhizome> nettime or...
     Are Flagan <areflagan {AT} artpanorama.com>
why i gave rhizome $20
     "McKenzie Wark" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>
rhizome: another idea, I hope it's a new one
     "enbyoire e" <enbyoire {AT} hotmail.com>

Subject: Re: <nettime> r h  i   z    o     m      e   digest <...>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "Brice Bowman" <brice {AT} bricebowman.com>
Subject: Re: <nettime> r h  i   z    o     m      e   digest <...>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:08:30 -0800

Amy,

...at the moment, I can not contribute a remedy, but I wanted to express my
agreement with your comments.

Brice Bowman

----- Original Message -----
from: "nettime's_privatization_authority" <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>
to: <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>
sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 2:13 PM
subject: <nettime> r h i z o m e digest [alexander, hunsinger, brace]

 <...>
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 02:22:30 -0800 (PST)
> From: Amy Alexander <plagiari {AT} plagiarist.org>
> Subject: Rhizome and the disappearing presence
>
> Before Rhizome went subscription-only, people could stumble upon its texts
> by looking up topics in a search engine. This was useful not only for new
> media people, but also for members of the general public - it was possible
> for people to discover the new media art community and its texts without
> being aware of them beforehand.
 <...>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "Patrick Lichty" <voyd {AT} voyd.com>
Subject: Re: <nettime> r h  i   z    o     m      e   digest 
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 12:59:37 -0600

This has been my argument with Brad BRace for years in regards to the
infinite backing up of archives.
My contention is that archives will not distribute infinitely, thus creating
an infallible record over time.
However, it might be interesting if someone were of the mind to consider
getting the archive and mirroring it.

----- Original Message -----
from: "nettime's_privatization_authority" <nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net>
to: <nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net>
sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 4:13 PM
subject: <nettime> r h i z o m e digest [alexander, hunsinger, brace]

 <...>
> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 08:43:31 -0800 (PST)
> From: { brad brace } <bbrace {AT} eskimo.com>
> Subject: Re: <nettime> rhizome: burn rate
>
> Subscribe: rhizome-list-subscribe {AT} yahoogroups.com
 <...>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 15:10:33 -0500
Subject: <nettime> rhizome or <rhizome> nettime or...
From: Are Flagan <areflagan {AT} artpanorama.com>

People, here's a novel concept for the Internet age: either, or, both.

Well, due to my idiocy of opening up this thread, I have learnt that
academics occasionally spit in tin cups around Christmas time, if the
recipient is sufficiently dehydrated. I have learnt that artists who write
from institutional domains certainly don't need institutions in their life.
I have learnt that local isn't global enough when it's neo-imperial and
neo-colonial. I have learnt that idealism is born to point out that things
aren't ideal when they aren't ideal. I have learnt that moderation is to
filter in excess. I have learnt that money moves in mysterious ways after
it's found. I have learnt that you can usually pin it all on evil and leave
it at that. I have learnt that a community does not include those who want
no part of it. And I have learnt that in the ideal community one can
sacrifice one community for another community to form a community.

Don't forget the basic lesson of the network; it's all connected somehow.

-af

PS: Did anyone even bother to mention that it's all free on Fridays? See you
at happy hour.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "McKenzie Wark" <mckenziewark {AT} hotmail.com>
Subject: why i gave rhizome $20
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 17:57:07 -0500

Well, in the first place, to make up for some of you hyper-critical
cheapskates... I've never had much to do with Rhizome. I'm not
involved in it. Some of the criticisms of it i've seen lately have some
force. But it just strikes me this anti-rhizome discourse is insular
and narrow. It doesn't represent a strategic approach to the interests
of the net art/thought community. The question is not what rhizome
did in the past, but whether we should help give it breathing room
to consider its future. I think we need all of the forms and scales of
institution we can get. This is not a time to be celebrating the
possible demise of what is really still a very small experiment in
creating forms of ongoing life in digital culture.

___________________________________________________

http://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors0/warktext.html
                   ... we no longer have roots, we have aerials ...
___________________________________________________

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "enbyoire e" <enbyoire {AT} hotmail.com>
Subject: <nettime> rhizome: another idea, I hope it's a new one
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 02:23:42 +0100

Hi readers-
I followed all this mails about rhizome's future ways and how each one 
thinks about it. I'm already kinda "forced" to follow the context- every day 
more and more comments about that rhizome. If it should or should not 
collect money. well, J. Hopkins mail, especially this part
[citate]" .... to "participate" in my network, I don't rely on nettime, 
rhizome, 7-11, neoscenes, or any other system.  I rely on point-to-point 
dialogue, sustained and attentive.  I liked rhizome better when it 
represented less than a handful of en-faced people.  now it is an 
institution. "[citate ends]

Institutions have something non-dynamic. Like an archive, a museum.
Networking on the other side is very dynamic. Like a dialogue, a chat.

Thinking about it brought me to this:
Often point2point (as SinglePoint OR MultiplePoint2SP/MP) shared information 
gets lost short before it is needed the most, or information shared between 
p2p would be of high value for thirds ("mazed broadcast"), who we're not-or 
not early enough in this network to pick it up. Or explained with the 
bar-thing (my english IS bad...):
You enter your favored bar/pub, and realise that the guy's you've wanted to 
talk with about "xy" just HAD a discussion about xy, but changed the topic 
right now. With simply knowing what they results of xy are, you would be 
able to follow the new topic about xzx.

A bit more details- lets think about "Arc" and "Dyn"...
First:
"Dyn.rhizome.org" (ie., a subdomain would be easy to register)
domain gets made for communication. The design of the main portal of both 
Arc and Dyn look similar, but with the difference that Dyn won't need the 
paid membership to enter. And that Dyn is only for communication of the 
"now". Like- email subscription to all lists is made possible. Like (maybe) 
a realtime chat. Bar/Pub life...
Those of you who realize the inner worth of rhizomes will stay on 
Dyn.rhizome as long as possible, but still, one day you'll find that guy 
"Don Juan" talks about a certain topic that came up before you started to 
participate. Or you've deleted the mail, because when it arrived, you wasn't 
interested in the topic (say, 2 years ago...). Or its an information 
"commonly" known in the circle you've entered, but you lack of that certain 
knowlegde( well, hey, its the "age of specialication"...) If you don't wan't 
to "harass" others about it asking the basics or u want proved evidence of 
something- what will you do? you turn to:

Second:
The "arc.rhizome.org"
domain holds archives of mails that were sent over the Dyn-Site and static 
things like personal websites, calendary, news with pictures of art, 
artists, events. "Added-value", U know what i mean :-).
For researches, for finding past entries, to find mails written for or about 
certain events/things/topics. And for that, the membership costs 5$. Thats 
easily affordable, is it?! Those artists (I'm not member yet, anyway all new 
to this, so I don't know EXACTLY whats behind the member entry right now) 
with a certain amount of accesses will get part-icipated in the successes of 
rhizome because rhizome successes only with their participation! Means, with 
some kind of "stocks" with a dividend- in other word, $$$$z. (in the 
beginning, more like 0,00001*$)

This would request rhizome a great amount of administrative energy in the 
beginning, but as soon as it gets "institutionalized", it will get more and 
more easy. It requests for monitoring the accesses. It requests for sober 
classification and assignation of the information to the originating 
artist(a well feeded knowlegde management system?). It requests for the hard 
tackling of "who will get how much". At last,those artists sharing a lot of 
common interest will get rewarded. Which can end in "unfair" valueing and 
demotivated artists who wanted to go for the big bucks by sending stuff 
thats just too cheap to get any interest. Do rhizome need these in long 
term, to make it through another 10 years?  On the other hand- what can be 
expected "common" on such an "arty"-website? Uncommon behaviour, uncommon 
interests, I guess. The fantastic thing about internet is, that those who're 
searching will find their counterpart somewhere and somehow. there are more 
common and stronger flows, but there's also a strong flow in the search for 
the uncommon(some of "us" do find it on or through rhizome). Simply because 
its easier to find the uncommon in the internet than in the "real world".
Artists who write and share valuable information for rhizome did so the last 
years. They will continue, and enjoy the nice side-effect of that bit of 
"pocket money" which drops into their purses ;-) (those artists of you who 
are honoris causa, professors, professionals and consultants who already get 
billions of $$ a year and every year- waive or spend into a "students want 
rhizome too-fund"...)

Now- the rhizomers can manage the amount given to the artists whose content 
is requested the most. They can set it to a maximum which will allow 
rhizome.org to pay the administrative dues, pay their chairs and desks, an 
adequate room, the internet-bills, servers and discspace, programmers and 
SUV's for their favored 72/50402 Caddies (hehe, joke ;-) ).

What I wanted to say with all the above: I just hope the discussion about 
rhizome ends soon and leaves space for something more interesting. aight?!
Greetingz,

Enb

>from: John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} uiah.fi>
>reply-To: John Hopkins <jhopkins {AT} uiah.fi>
>to: nettime-l {AT} bbs.thing.net
>subject: Re: <nettime> rhizome: burn rate
>date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 22:06:48 -0700
>
>Hallo all --
>
>also being disturbed by the further reification and centralization of
 <...>

_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net