Re: RRR Revving: Up:the rapture and anti-environmentalism

At 03:58 PM 23/03/2005, you wrote:
>we should really think about taking this further - i agree, but maybe not
>in the direction of writen dialogue.
>Maybe this is the point where we try to map out this argument in a visual
>or interactive form. Show me why you think what you do.


sounds zoo.perb. any1 who has actually been following/partic[le]ipating in
the thread n.terested?

>I can offer some server space.
>I would like to see
>why not take this further

n.deedily, y on type not?

>This very type of exchange could really grow into something that has more
>meaning. It is a little sad to see that this appeasrs to have lost it's
>steam right where this debate always looses it steam. Sometimes we need to
>look at the problem in different ways in order to progress.

yup, + not only that, but i think it a valuable x.tension 2 n.courage
format/stylistic/visualisation changes in terms of teasing out various
directions/motives/backgrounds….

>It would be a good way to bring this topic back into the realm of new
>media, and actually generate some?

i'm up for it, would even trawl the arc.hives 2 develop an angle on the
thread in qs.

chunks,
mez

–no.logo.[-D-]scenting–
–dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.
–spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning
http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/


.

Comments

, Pall Thayer

Sounds like a great idea, I'm all for it. I think the steam issue is a
very interesting one. Exploring why the steam is lost and where it goes.
Why are we afraid to discuss our points of view in a public setting when
we know that the majority of the group is going to disagree with us?
Aren't we firm enough in our beliefs? Or perhaps it has to do with how
well we know our adversary. How much does he or she really know about my
opinion/point of view? Is it more or less than what I know? And how much
do I know about his or her opinion/point of view? The less I know, the
more insecure I'm going to feel in such a discussion and the more I'm
going to hope that it fades away.

How about a piece that monitors Rhizome raw and if a post goes
unanswered for, say, 3 hours, a puff of steam is somehow displayed on
the screen (that would be the posting losing it's steam). Or perhaps a
more metaphoric type of steam. I like the idea of monitoring raw and
somehow creating a reaction to a post that goes unanswered for a period
of time. But then it should somehow also display the posts that don't
fizzle (that accumulate steam) to give an idea of the ratio. Makes me
wonder how these things normally progress. When one thread fades, does
another automatically take over? That is, does the "steam" always shift
from one thread to another or can there be several active threads
simultaneously (when I think about it, that's not something I remember
seeing on raw) or can there be moments of total lack of steam (coal
shortage)? Neither accumulating nor losing? Anyway, there's a start.

Pall

][m e z ][ wrote:
> At 03:58 PM 23/03/2005, you wrote:
>
>> we should really think about taking this further - i agree, but maybe
>> not in the direction of writen dialogue.
>> Maybe this is the point where we try to map out this argument in a
>> visual or interactive form. Show me why you think what you do.
>
>
>
> sounds zoo.perb. any1 who has actually been following/partic[le]ipating
> in the thread n.terested?
>
>> I can offer some server space.
>> I would like to see
>> why not take this further
>
>
> n.deedily, y on type not?
>
>> This very type of exchange could really grow into something that has
>> more meaning. It is a little sad to see that this appeasrs to have
>> lost it's steam right where this debate always looses it steam.
>> Sometimes we need to look at the problem in different ways in order to
>> progress.
>
>
> yup, + not only that, but i think it a valuable x.tension 2 n.courage
> format/stylistic/visualisation changes in terms of teasing out various
> directions/motives/backgrounds….
>
>> It would be a good way to bring this topic back into the realm of new
>> media, and actually generate some?
>
>
> i'm up for it, would even trawl the arc.hives 2 develop an angle on the
> thread in qs.
>
> chunks,
> mez
>
> –no.logo.[-D-]scenting–
> –dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.
> –spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning
> http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/
>
>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> 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
artist/teacher
http://www.this.is/pallit
http://pallit.lhi.is/panse

Lorna
http://www.this.is/lorna
_______________________________

, curt cloninger

[note to self: just lay low. Pall has pschoanalyzed your secret fears incicively, and you're only hope is to wait for the dialogue to quietly die down. Yes, you've had these same kinds of dialogues ad nauseum online since 1996, but it's not that you're bored to tears with them and you realize they are utterly fruitless spectacles in the context of mailing lists and bulletin boards. it's that your beliefs are soft. You have always shown yourself cowed by the airtight logic of the rhizome intelligencia, and the inassailability of thier largely inherited progressive positions has been your undoing time and time again! Shh! Not another word! They might hear you.] Don't post! No don't hit post! Stop! Sto

vroooooommmm!!!!

++++++++++++++++

Pall Thayer wrote:

Why are we afraid to discuss our points of view in a public setting when
we know that the majority of the group is going to disagree with us?
Aren't we firm enough in our beliefs? Or perhaps it has to do with how
well we know our adversary. How much does he or she really know about my
opinion/point of view? Is it more or less than what I know? And how much
do I know about his or her opinion/point of view? The less I know, the
more insecure I'm going to feel in such a discussion and the more I'm
going to hope that it fades away.

, Jeremy Zilar

I plan on actually working on this when i get home. I really want to see
the dialogue that will ensue around such a thing, and the process of
creating such a thing. To map a discussion, and clearly present a map of a
discussion. I like Pall's idea. If there was such a thing as a visual
representation of a religous debate being created - the dialogue
surrounging its creation would be just as interesting as the thing itself.
Infact, it is in the creation of the argument that the argument forms.
So, where does the argument begin in the creation of the debate over gay
rights, christianity, american idealism, etc…

-jeremy

> Sounds like a great idea, I'm all for it. I think the steam issue is a
> very interesting one. Exploring why the steam is lost and where it goes.
> Why are we afraid to discuss our points of view in a public setting when
> we know that the majority of the group is going to disagree with us?
> Aren't we firm enough in our beliefs? Or perhaps it has to do with how
> well we know our adversary. How much does he or she really know about my
> opinion/point of view? Is it more or less than what I know? And how much
> do I know about his or her opinion/point of view? The less I know, the
> more insecure I'm going to feel in such a discussion and the more I'm
> going to hope that it fades away.
>
> How about a piece that monitors Rhizome raw and if a post goes
> unanswered for, say, 3 hours, a puff of steam is somehow displayed on
> the screen (that would be the posting losing it's steam). Or perhaps a
> more metaphoric type of steam. I like the idea of monitoring raw and
> somehow creating a reaction to a post that goes unanswered for a period
> of time. But then it should somehow also display the posts that don't
> fizzle (that accumulate steam) to give an idea of the ratio. Makes me
> wonder how these things normally progress. When one thread fades, does
> another automatically take over? That is, does the "steam" always shift
> from one thread to another or can there be several active threads
> simultaneously (when I think about it, that's not something I remember
> seeing on raw) or can there be moments of total lack of steam (coal
> shortage)? Neither accumulating nor losing? Anyway, there's a start.
>
> Pall
>
> ][m e z ][ wrote:
>> At 03:58 PM 23/03/2005, you wrote:
>>
>>> we should really think about taking this further - i agree, but maybe
>>> not in the direction of writen dialogue.
>>> Maybe this is the point where we try to map out this argument in a
>>> visual or interactive form. Show me why you think what you do.
>>
>>
>>
>> sounds zoo.perb. any1 who has actually been following/partic[le]ipating
>> in the thread n.terested?
>>
>>> I can offer some server space.
>>> I would like to see
>>> why not take this further
>>
>>
>> n.deedily, y on type not?
>>
>>> This very type of exchange could really grow into something that has
>>> more meaning. It is a little sad to see that this appeasrs to have
>>> lost it's steam right where this debate always looses it steam.
>>> Sometimes we need to look at the problem in different ways in order to
>>> progress.
>>
>>
>> yup, + not only that, but i think it a valuable x.tension 2 n.courage
>> format/stylistic/visualisation changes in terms of teasing out various
>> directions/motives/backgrounds….
>>
>>> It would be a good way to bring this topic back into the realm of new
>>> media, and actually generate some?
>>
>>
>> i'm up for it, would even trawl the arc.hives 2 develop an angle on the
>> thread in qs.
>>
>> chunks,
>> mez
>>
>> –no.logo.[-D-]scenting–
>> –dreaming.caramelized.txt.body.trickling.
>> –spraypaint.attractors = doll.functioning
>> http://www.hotkey.net.au/~netwurker/
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> +
>> -> post: [email protected]
>> -> questions: [email protected]
>> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
>> +
>> 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
> artist/teacher
> http://www.this.is/pallit
> http://pallit.lhi.is/panse
>
> Lorna
> http://www.this.is/lorna
> _______________________________
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>

, ryan griffis

> vroooooommmm!!!!

i make a "swoosh" sound when i send mail. don't tell nike

, Plasma Studii

>>vroooooommmm!!!!
>
>i make a "swoosh" sound when i send mail. don't tell nike

, mez breeze

Quoting "pall":

>Sounds like a great idea, I'm all for it. I think the steam issue is a
>very interesting one. Exploring why the steam is lost and where it goes.

i'm with u up 2 about _here_….

>Why are we afraid to discuss our points of view in a public setting when
>we know that the majority of the group is going to disagree with us?

well, it could b that b.ing considered a troll isn't good 4 1's self-esteem;)….

>Aren't we firm enough in our beliefs?

hmm…i'm less keen 2 perpetuate/map/transfer_in2_nodal||mm_documentation rigid
beliefs structures themselves, + n.stead try 2 focus on how these beliefs r
constructed/e.[ab]rupt…..

>Or perhaps it has to do with how
>well we know our adversary.

yikes…adversary? perhaps i'm more keen 2 actually build [con]textures that
note ppls motivators/loadings than conceptualise it thru an actual argumentaive
locus-of-control point?

>How much does he or she really know about my
>opinion/point of view? Is it more or less than what I know? And how much
>do I know about his or her opinion/point of view?

…more this [above] + less the below?

>The less I know, the
>more insecure I'm going to feel in such a discussion and the more I'm
>going to hope that it fades away.

>How about a piece that monitors Rhizome raw and if a post goes unanswered
>for, say, 3 hours, a puff of steam is somehow displayed on the screen
>(that would be the posting losing it's steam).

again, i'm more for sets that capture contextual elements rather than a
monitoring/critical standard.

>Or perhaps a more
>metaphoric type of steam. I like the idea of monitoring raw and somehow
>creating a reaction to a post that goes unanswered for a period of time.
>But then it should somehow also display the posts that don't fizzle (that
>accumulate steam) to give an idea of the ratio.

big pha[rming]t yes;)

][mez][

, Pall Thayer

Re-awakening this thread just slightly, as I've been out of town for a
few days. Curt, I wasn't psychoanalyzing you. My post was as much about
myself or anyone else. I didn't mean to offend you. I was just wondering
out loud why we do this. I would be interested in knowing, in the
context of wondering about the fizzling out of discussions, what makes
the discussions "fruitless". What would make them fruitfull?

Pall

curt cloninger wrote:
> [note to self: just lay low. Pall has pschoanalyzed your secret fears incicively, and you're only hope is to wait for the dialogue to quietly die down. Yes, you've had these same kinds of dialogues ad nauseum online since 1996, but it's not that you're bored to tears with them and you realize they are utterly fruitless spectacles in the context of mailing lists and bulletin boards. it's that your beliefs are soft. You have always shown yourself cowed by the airtight logic of the rhizome intelligencia, and the inassailability of thier largely inherited progressive positions has been your undoing time and time again! Shh! Not another word! They might hear you.] Don't post! No don't hit post! Stop! Sto
>
> vroooooommmm!!!!
>
> ++++++++++++++++
>
> Pall Thayer wrote:
>
> Why are we afraid to discuss our points of view in a public setting when
> we know that the majority of the group is going to disagree with us?
> Aren't we firm enough in our beliefs? Or perhaps it has to do with how
> well we know our adversary. How much does he or she really know about my
> opinion/point of view? Is it more or less than what I know? And how much
> do I know about his or her opinion/point of view? The less I know, the
> more insecure I'm going to feel in such a discussion and the more I'm
> going to hope that it fades away.
> +
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> -> visit: on Fridays the Rhizome.org web site is open to non-members
> +
> 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
artist/teacher
http://www.this.is/pallit
http://pallit.lhi.is/panse

Lorna
http://www.this.is/lorna
_______________________________

, curt cloninger

Hi Pall,

No offense taken. I was just being fiesty.

I've had lots of fruitful conversations at rhizome about a number of
topics (not all directly art-related). And I've had a handful of
fruitful conversations about "hot topic" ethical issues, but almost
all of those have been in one-on-one settings (either in person or
via email). A conversation is fruitless when everyone is talking
from prefab polemic positions and no one is listening or being
personally vulnerable (some cynics would say this is all that ever
happens anyway, but my experience indicates otherwise). The trick is
finding the appropriate forum for the appropriate topic. Some
sensationalist US talk shows (jerry springer, crossfire) go out of
their way to mismatch the most inappropriate topics with the most
inappropriate fora. And some viewers enjoy the contrived spectacles
that ensue. I don't watch television.

As far as keeping a topic going, the solution is rarely to post
asking people to keep the topic going [such a post is off-topic].
Just keep posting about the topic. If someone wants to dialogue,
you've got a conversation. If not, register as a second user and
dialogue with yourself. Or let the topic fizzle out, spend time with
your family, go on a run, write an article on the non-linear
narrative implications of social networks, take a nap, listen to the
Ramones, grade student papers, post another more interesteing topic,
check your referrer logs, walk up into the hills, eat chicken salad,
watch another episode of Flying Circus on DVD.

rock & roll ain't no pollution,
curt






At 9:44 AM +0000 3/27/05, Pall Thayer wrote:
>Re-awakening this thread just slightly, as I've been out of town for
>a few days. Curt, I wasn't psychoanalyzing you. My post was as much
>about myself or anyone else. I didn't mean to offend you. I was just
>wondering out loud why we do this. I would be interested in knowing,
>in the context of wondering about the fizzling out of discussions,
>what makes the discussions "fruitless". What would make them
>fruitfull?
>
>Pall