Maybe we should make a digg-like system for Rhizome where members can
digg articles they find around the web for Rhizome inclusion. That
would be the 2.0 way to go :-) But I don't really mean that. I've
been watching reddit.com
for a while and it's spiraling downwards in
a mess of abuse for personal gain and so forth.
I don't really know what I want Rhizome to be. I'm just pretty sure
that it doesn't seem to be exactly what I want it to be (whatever
that may be).
This response is pretty ambiguous. I'm just going to shut up now and
think about this for a few months. Perhaps I'll re-emerge with a
gleam of clarity in my eye.
On 28.10.2006, at 11:55, Marisa Olson wrote:
> Hi, Pall, et al.
> All of these things do go straight into the reblog, as do Artbase
> additions and Raw posts selected by Site Editors. However, the reblog
> furthers our goal of informing people about what's happening in new
> media, and supporting those activities, by aggregating those notices
> that the Site Editors find interesting, presenting them in a one-stop
> site/feed, and this also giving the artists involved an additional
> opportunity for contemplation of their work--which we know is still
> all too rare, in this field.
> I get extremely thankful letters from people, everyday, about the
> difference it made to them to have been included in the reblog (let
> alone the original site from which we reblogged) and I think this is
> one way (albeit one of our many programs) to support the field. There
> is also quite a 'demand' for this information and this format of
> presentation, which is probably one of the reasons that, for instance,
> our Raw subscribers are such a small percentage of our overall readers
> and RSS subscribers.
> Still, I'd like to see more original content, as well. I've posted
> calls for writers and member-curated exhibits on several occasions.
> The door is always open on those. It's been interesting for me to
> note, though, the shift in the types (and amounts) of 'content' that
> people are producing and seeking to consume, and the ways in which
> they do so, since the olden days when I first signed up to Rhizome.
> Francis used to refer to this as a shift between Push vs Pull models
> of readership. We're committed to both.
> If we're going to support the field, we've got to keep up with it.
> This has always been my personal take. I know you're interested in the
> 2.0, as well, Pall. :)
> On 10/28/06, Pall Thayer <email@example.com
>> Personally, I would like to see less reblogging and a renewed focus
>> on original content. In other words, I would like to visit the
>> Rhizome site to see the Rhizome site rather than to see what's going
>> on on other sites. I would like to see Rhizome News, Spotlight,
>> Member curated exhibits, etc. as primary elements and the Reblogged
>> stuff as a side element.
>> On 27.10.2006, at 12:04, Marisa Olson wrote:
>> > Dear all,
>> > We've recently seen some turnover among our Site Editors (formerly
>> > known
>> > as 'Superusers'), with some inactive members stepping down and some
>> > becoming "Emeritus." At this time, I would like to add four new
>> > Editors to our roster--and more in the future. I'm hoping that some
>> > of you
>> > will be interested in getting involved.
>> > It would be ideal to bring on people who are familiar with new
>> > media art
>> > and have a background of involvement in the Rhizome community. One
>> > of our
>> > goals with a collectively-edited reblog was to have a diversity of
>> > voices
>> > representing our diverse field, something that only happens when
>> > people
>> > are able to fully commit to this volunteer position, which entails
>> > reblogging at least ten items per month. Community participation is
>> > crucial to the Reblog's success, and I thank you for
>> considering this
>> > commitment. Below is the official 'job description.' Please
>> email me,
>> > off-list, if you are interested or have any questions.
>> > Rhizome's Site Editors play an important role in determining the
>> > content
>> > that appears on our website. Each Site Editor actively
>> researches and
>> > publishes texts on our front page Reblog, including select posts
>> > from the
>> > Rhizome Raw discussion list, which Site Editors evaluate for merit,
>> > quality, and historical significance. Each of these texts is
>> > permanently
>> > archived and the discussions, announcements, reviews, essays, and
>> > other
>> > posts published from Raw are assigned searchable "metadata" terms
>> > by Site
>> > Editors, published to the Rhizome Rare discussion list, and posted
>> > on the
>> > Reblog. Site Editors are then actively involved in historicizing
>> > initiating discourse about new media art.
>> > Thanks,
>> > Marisa
>> > + + +
>> > Marisa Olson
>> > Editor & Curator
>> > Rhizome.org
>> > New Museum of Contemporary Art
>> > +
>> > -> post: firstname.lastname@example.org
>> > -> questions: email@example.com
>> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
>> > subscribe.rhiz
>> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> > +
>> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>> > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/
>> > 29.php
>> Pall Thayer
> -> post: firstname.lastname@example.org
> -> questions: email@example.com
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/