In response to Rupert & Roger : The Internet is already , and will continue to be, a massive influence on the creation, consumption and even definition of poetry/word art/text generation, whatever. Although that old crypto-Papist techno-determinist Mc Luhan got the small print wrong he was right about the big picture and the mega mix, the global village of pillage, the medium being the missile/missal , the message as frottage,our immersive pottage... he proclaimed Joyce and the high priests of modernism for embodying the tropes and memes of mass media in their work and had lotsa pun doing it... Digi tech on the web drives this process faster and further into new territories. Yes, I know you can't go to bed with a cosyiMac, that gentle browsing easily becomes manic itchy finger grazing, and I recall that books are wonderful low tech devices (I love mine, even after my experiences in the used-book cartels). I recognise that with a massive surplus of global poetry production too many poems hang around in the web like dead bluebottles ("The Emperor said there were TOO MANY NOH PLAYS!" Ezra Pound, ABC of Reading). But the whole political economy and hierarchy of poetry starts to shift if everyone (everyone with sufficient energy & capital that is) can nail their hyperthesis to the virtual door of the canonical cathedra. "Poetry will be made by all..." said Lautreamont. Now, to quote my learned friend Doktor DNA Lawrence Russell, " we have more writers than readers..." Is the poem a commodity? Or is it a floating text, a director's cut or a reader's cut-up? One point that McLuhan made was that culture tends to use the rear-view mirror when dealing at first with technological change (e.g very early filmed narrative being shot like staged play from single viewpoint, Porter, Griffiths, Eisenstein learning the language of cinema through experiment, early BBC TV thinking of newscasts as radio with a few pictures). Now, after a decade of poetry on the WWW we're already seeing ( in the work of quite a few members of this list) not only extensions of collage/montage/cut-up ( all facilitated by the technology common to all text-editing and hypertext-reading platforms) but multi-media (audio & video), collective composition, extended intertextuality ( quite literally via hyperlink) de-centering of the authorial voice, alternative narrative pathways and what Lev Manovich (http://www.manovich.net/ ) has called a "data-base" aesthetic as opposed to a deployment of linear structures. Where this goes, I don't know yet. It could be that among a few writers there could be some kind of Wordsworthian reaction as in the classic early Ballard story where the poets of Vermilion Sands give up writing computerised pastiches on their clunky punched card machines to pursue the Muse. Also possible is a collapse/implosion of the world's industrial infrastructure as a result of global struggles over diminishing energy, in which case the web goes down and we get out our chewed pencils. But I'll wager - I'll buy Rupert a pint to put by his (virtual) notebook - that in a decade (Oct 9 2014) that the web and the e-book will have totally redefined the way we do poetry...