Keep the discussion to art

Hello list,

In a message dated 10/10/2002 23:03:22 GMT Daylight Time, [email protected]
writes:

> Could we keep the discussion on art. Sure some politics, in an art related
> way makes sense, but take the rest elsewhere. Remember our email addresses
> are on the posts, take it off the list if you want.

Wayne, though I can understand your frustration I think this would be a real
shame. Over a year ago i was thinking of unsubscribing to this list because
of all the 'noise' as you put it. And then September 11th happened, and this
list filled with the most interesting 'off topic' discussions. There were a
lot of first-hand accounts of the aftermath, possibly because Rhizome is
based in NY, and many people posted interesting articles and opinions. I
remember in particular Joy Garnett's many posts at this time.

So I stayed on the list and I am not even a 'net artist'. Even Death's posts
can contain some interesting observations. In relation to 'art', shouldn't
everything be potentially relevant? What kind of political discussion do you
define as 'art related'? And is it not important that 'artists' feel they can
share comment on things that are not necessarily strictly 'art'?

Keep up the good work!

Jon

I have to agree with Wayne's sentiment - This is supposed to be a
moderated list - but it seems anything can get thru. I think a
general forum like the NYT's would be more appropriate. At least
that way people who have joined this list are not subjected to the
100 or so emails you end up deleting every freakin 30 mins.

But then again who I am I to suggest such a thing!

GIZNAD

>
>
>Hey guys, I am not in favour of censorship of any kind, except for a
>bit of self control. This morning I got up and there were about 48
>RHIZOME posts, only about 5 of which concerned new media art.
>
>Now I've only been on the list about two weeks but the above
>proportions of content to noise seems about consistent. I suspect a
>lot of interesting people subscribe to the list, say awhile and then
>drop out because the noise level is too high. These are often going
>to be really interesting people who are more interested in making
>art than making puerile personal attacks and political exchanges.
>There are lists for both of those, I'm sure.
>
>Could we keep the discussion on art. Sure some politics, in an art
>related way makes sense, but take the rest elsewhere. Remember our
>email addresses are on the posts, take it off the list if you want.
>
>How about we show a bit of courtesy to all the members of the list,
>and keep it relevant.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Wayne
><http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/startit.html>


–

Thanks Wayne. What could be worse than artists discussing a huge fucking
war? The state of the world and all. Artists should never discuss this war
with each other! It should be prohibited! It's not content.

In other words sign the fuck off if you don't like it. Rare will be to your
taste buddy, 12-15 per day, all content-oriented. Ya bitch.


>From: "Wayne J. Cosshall" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: "Wayne J. Cosshall" <[email protected]>
>To: <[email protected]>
>Subject: RHIZOME\_RAW: Keep the discussion to art
>Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 07:59:36 +1000
>
>Hey guys, I am not in favour of censorship of any kind, except for a bit of
>self control. This morning I got up and there were about 48 RHIZOME posts,
>only about 5 of which concerned new media art.
>
>Now I

>From: steve danzig <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: steve danzig <[email protected]>
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Fwd: RHIZOME_RAW: Keep the discussion to art
>Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:09:19 +1000
>
>I have to agree with Wayne's sentiment - This is supposed to be a moderated
>list

Who ever said Raw is moderated? Rare's back in two days so go for that.
All good in God's Holy Hood.

- but it seems anything can get thru. I think a
>general forum like the NYT's would be more appropriate.

Yeah that would just be peachier than all hell. It would be so appropriate,
good, and some other words.

At least
>that way people who have joined this list are not subjected to the 100 or
>so emails you end up deleting every freakin 30 mins.

Don't exaggerate. People are posting a lot because of this god damn war,
dontcha get it Steve? Good grief. You want NYT, go to NYT.

>
>But then again who I am I to suggest such a thing!

I don't know, a famous balanced genius? If so start your own web list and
moderate it as you see fit. I wouldn't waste five seconds on this list if
it was moderated. How long you been on?

What did you expect,

noalternative.com

++

>
>GIZNAD
>
>>
>>
>>Hey guys, I am not in favour of censorship of any kind, except for a bit
>>of self control. This morning I got up and there were about 48 RHIZOME
>>posts, only about 5 of which concerned new media art.
>>
>>Now I've only been on the list about two weeks

Well there's the pooper ain't she.

but the above
>>proportions of content to noise seems about consistent. I suspect a lot of
>>interesting people subscribe to the list, say awhile and then drop out
>>because the noise level is too high.

What color is the wind?

These are often
>>going to be really interesting people who are more interested in making
>>art than making puerile personal attacks and political exchanges. There
>>are lists for both of those, I'm sure.
>>
>>Could we keep the discussion on art. Sure some politics,

What do you think this is, Red Lobster?

in an art
>>related way makes sense, but take the rest elsewhere. Remember our email
>>addresses are on the posts, take it off the list if you want.
>>
>>How about we show a bit of courtesy to all the members of the list, and
>>keep it relevant.

Why is "A" the most powerful letter in the alphabet?

>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Wayne

Because you can shove it up your ass.

>><http://www.internationaldigitalart.com/startit.html>
>
>
>–




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

Keep the discussion to art
—– Original Message —–
From: Wayne J. Cosshall
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 11:59 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Keep the discussion to art


Hey guys, I am not in favour of censorship of any kind, except for a bit =
of self control. This morning I got up and there were about 48 RHIZOME post=
s, only about 5 of which concerned new media art.

that makes 43 posts of pure new media raw material … use it.

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:

> Hey guys, I am not in favour of censorship of any kind, except for a bit of
> self control. This morning I got up and there were about 48 RHIZOME posts,
> only about 5 of which concerned new media art.

According to your opinion. Your opinion value = 0.
How about you take a pill of your own advice about 'self-control'
and quit attempting to 'direct' the list to your liking?

> Now I

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, steve danzig wrote:

> I have to agree with Wayne's sentiment - This is supposed to be a
> moderated list - but it seems anything can get thru.

Er?? This is supposed to be a moderated list?

> I think a general forum like the NYT's would be more appropriate.

You can't think. And you're not thinking. You're only knee-jerking
in a control-freak manner because you're pissy about your mailbox.

> At least that way people who have joined this list are not subjected

Oh right. You are now 'people'.

> to the 100 or so emails you

People. You. Typical narcissitic infantile idiocy.
Appropriating voices of others.

> end up deleting every freakin 30 mins.

I dunno. I don't end up deleting 100 mails every freakin 30 mins.
talk about yourself.

> But then again who I am I to suggest such a thing!

Oh right! Throw in a pitch of faux-humility–you'll make yourself
more victim-like and likable so people will feel sorry for ya–
bla bla, pity extortion.

Funny that someone so mentally, sexually and emotionally immature as
you–which precludes creation of art consciously (though note I did not
say one should give up trying necessarily)–attempts to 'dictate'.


`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

GEEE that's TELLING me …Karei

OK I promise to do better next time ….I really do…. and if I
don't, you just get in there and put me back in my place….. LSHICHB!


>On Fri, 11 Oct 2002, steve danzig wrote:
>
>> I have to agree with Wayne's sentiment - This is supposed to be a
>> moderated list - but it seems anything can get thru.
>
> Er?? This is supposed to be a moderated list?
>
>> I think a general forum like the NYT's would be more appropriate.
>
> You can't think. And you're not thinking. You're only knee-jerking
> in a control-freak manner because you're pissy about your mailbox.
>
>> At least that way people who have joined this list are not subjected
>
> Oh right. You are now 'people'.
>
>> to the 100 or so emails you
>
> People. You. Typical narcissitic infantile idiocy.
> Appropriating voices of others.
>
>> end up deleting every freakin 30 mins.
>
> I dunno. I don't end up deleting 100 mails every freakin 30 mins.
> talk about yourself.
>
>> But then again who I am I to suggest such a thing!
>
> Oh right! Throw in a pitch of faux-humility–you'll make yourself
> more victim-like and likable so people will feel sorry for ya–
> bla bla, pity extortion.
>
> Funny that someone so mentally, sexually and emotionally immature as
> you–which precludes creation of art consciously (though note I did not
> say one should give up trying necessarily)–attempts to 'dictate'.
>
>
>`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42


–

Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:

>
> (though note I did not say one should give up trying necessarily)

An opening? You gave him an escape route? My world tremors.

Joseph

On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, steve danzig wrote:

> GEEE that's TELLING me …Karei

No, it isn't. Your knee-jerk interpretation is irrelevant.
Dontcha think that there's better ways of controlling you
than 'telling you' luv–if one were interested in such matters.
Hands up! You got me there!

> OK I promise to do better next time

As if.

> ….I really do…. and if I
> don't, you just get in there and put me back in my place….. LSHICHB!

I certainly would, luv.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 [email protected] wrote:

> An opening? You gave him an escape route? My world tremors.

I always do. This time it was just really obvious.

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42

Karei… thanks for your dedication although I'm a little bemused by
your follow-up.

My original post referred to a general frustration of receiving so
many unwanted email from the list…. I have since fixed this problem.

Why you need to take it personally and write back attempting to
belittle my character seems to be a knee-jerk reaction as well as you
having way too much time on your hands …. I mean who really cares!

I guess everyone's opinion is valid to a point…. when I read your
posts I keep thinking of the phrase, "Get a life!" for some strange
reason!




>On Sat, 12 Oct 2002, steve danzig wrote:
>
>> GEEE that's TELLING me …Karei
>
> No, it isn't. Your knee-jerk interpretation is irrelevant.
> Dontcha think that there's better ways of controlling you
> than 'telling you' luv–if one were interested in such matters.
> Hands up! You got me there!
>
>> OK I promise to do better next time
>
> As if.
>
>> ….I really do…. and if I
>> don't, you just get in there and put me back in my place….. LSHICHB!
>
> I certainly would, luv.
>
>`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42


–

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, steve danzig wrote:

> Karei… thanks for your dedication although I'm a little bemused by
> your follow-up.

Aren't we all.

> My original post referred to a general frustration of receiving so
> many unwanted email from the list…. I have since fixed this problem.

Don't beat the nettles cause you're frustrated.

> Why you need to take it personally

I can't possibly take anything personally even if I tried.
Nor would I ever do it when I could. Occupation with the
'self' produces stopping of mind.

> and write back attempting to belittle my character

Er. No such occurrence.

> seems to be a knee-jerk reaction

No it isn't. And mimicry of my words isn't going to ad
any validity to your statement.

> as well as you having way too much time on your hands ..

I have all the time in the universe! It's great!
Not that it's any of your business to judge what I do with it.

> .. I mean who really cares!

As if. <Flicks its wrist>

> I guess everyone's opinion is valid to a point..

No it isn't. Nor is it what I write opinions.

> when I read your posts I keep thinking of the phrase, "Get a life!"
> for some strange reason!

That must be because I: am attempting to belittle YOUR character!

<shriek>

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, steve danzig wrote:

> Well, I'll be the judge of that!

Standard idiotic reply.
You and Joseph should wag your tails in unison.