Wystan:
> robin,
> i say 'to the email group situation'--not 'peculiar to this email
> group'. i.e. all email discussion groups. the 'particular' applies to the
> 'scenario.' I was struck by that moment at which two mutually
exclusiveness
> views were proposed, Candice's and Kent's, as to the identity of David
> Hess's and Kent's emails. That was the moment of no return. wasn't it?
> wystan
Monday I agree with Candice ...
Tuesday I agree with Kent ...
Wednesday I think it doesn't matter: the end result's the same ...
Thursday I think it doesn't matter: the end result's the same ...
Friday I think it doesn't matter: the end result's the same ...
I take your point about the general email situation (though I'd tend even
then to localise it to 'the list situation', as even newsgroups have a
slightly different dynamic. The common element between email/list/group
would be the cyberidentity problem, but here we've got something including
but beyond that).
But having managed to drag myself out of that trailing parenthesis (and not
to push this too much further since things have calmed down, and the last
thing I want to do is stir it again) -- what we've had recently seems to be
local to a set of poetry groups, but also go beyond any one particular group
(of The Big Four, Poetics-at-Buffalo seems to be immune because it's [for
all of me] an only marginally galvinised corpse).
In an odd way, it's distinctly freaky, and beyond the norm of your average
cyberchaos.
(Incidentally, anyone come across an SF novel by Vernor Vinge called _A Fire
in the Deeps_? Not cyberpunk, but inter alia a mythologising of cyberspace.
It contains the [to me, enormously resonant phrase] "The Web of a Thousand
Lies", and makes instructive reading in the light of recent events.)
Robin
|