Seems like this discussion has a certain - or un-certain - multifaceted
interest strands, which seem to me possibly significant in themselves.
* The online prohibitive practices.
this reminded me the discussions / time-waste-activities circa '93-'95 re
stuff that is/isn't appropriate to say in emails, the amount of KB that
should be socially acceptable, the language usage, and possibly other
etiquette seeking/forming/enforcing sort of efforts.
Hence, perhaps a bit like Rob, I recall feeling a bit unsure how to join
or be a part of online discussions.
(still, I think, somehow daunting for new-comers..)
* Art linked histories.
While reading the initial emails in this thread, I tried to remember how I
associated art and MUDs, MOOs, and IRCs with artistic practices..
1st search led me to Sherry Turkle - later mentioned by Rob here - however
that wasn't the link.. (eg http://arty.li/ZY5 )
2nd came a memory of the performative in computer interfaces, Brenda
3rd was a search that led to a clustermag archive http://arty.li/ZYS where
indeed the preson I contacted/pestered at the time and showed me the link
to MOOs and MUDs was mentioned: Allucquére Rosanne Stone
I think that perhaps there is still a significance in current practices,
affairs and networks to the fact Stone was using MOOs and MUDs within
various identity shifts and mutations contexts..
I think Groys talks about the archive and archiving as a particular way to
transmit art from one generation/group-of-people/time to another on the
internet. (Am probably paraphrasing a bit..) However the issue/interest
remains rather illustratively poignant in this thread as by evoking
memories and lack of them, we instantly make sort of un-sorted archives
because we use this technology on its email archiving levels. Information
bits that could be used to transmit and convey a certain history and
histories that for most perhaps has never been?
Cheers and all the best!
http://digihub.org.uk (art & chat - monthly)
http://aharonic.net/roo (rhythm oriented ontology - possibly)
http://arty.li (url shortner fur artists - probably)
http://searchnarcissus.net (find dark shades of shadows and live to tell
about it - hopefully)
-aharon #basekamp in freenode (sporadically)
aharon/superuser on mumble - 220.127.116.11 (port 4505); digihub channels
> On 02/10/13 11:25 PM, Charlotte Frost wrote:
>> Before we even get into any discussion of lurking and flaming, I wonder if
>> you or anyone else has any thoughts on how prohibitive online spaces
can be to newcomers. I'm about to run the 3rd Academic Writing Month,
which uses a lot of Twitter, and someone just said to me they were
scared to death of taking part the first time round.
> I can entirely understand that.
> It wasn't until I'd spent several years being flamed on Usenet's alt.*
hierarchy and on programming mailing lists that I was able to jump into
the conversation on Rhizome RAW with any confidence.
> Twitter has been an amazing resource for contacts, conversation and news
over the last few years. That's something that's ripe for study I think.
>> And also I like your point - if I'm understanding correctly - about
different spaces giving rise to different types of
>> Today it's easy to compare the 'brands' of different social media
platforms but it's difficult to get a sense now of how one list would
>> differed from another - except by asking people to comment. So I'd love to
>> know which lists people used and why? Why the Syndicate rather than
Rhizome? Was it just geographical allegiance or was there a different
>> of discussion or a different value in being involved?
> Art historical ethnography?
> I joined Rhizome RAW quite late according to their archives and I
absolutely loved it. The transatlantic access and institutional context
it afforded was important. Its higher temperature was often creative,
for me at least.
> See here for why people were so upset when RAW was shut down and what
has changed since (if anyone reads that far my exasperated comment is,
in my old Rhizome style, a carefully chosen quote from "Aliens"):
> After RAW I switched to netbehaviour full time. I've had heated debates
on there but they've not descended to trolling, and that's directly a
product of the culture that the administrators have created and
> exemplified (and occasionally stepped in to enforce). I feel like I know
people better on netbehaviour, even though I first formed some key
relationships on RAW.
> Alongside these I was and still am on eu-gene, the generative art list.
This consists almost entirely of discussions of what generative art
actually is, and is completely wonderful.
> So yes I have found the character and value of each of these lists to be
different. And I also feel a different person on each, which would
please mid-90s Sherry Turkle.