joseph mcelroy
Since 2002
Works in New York United States of America

PORTFOLIO (2)
BIO
The McElroys are a husband and wife collaborative artist, technology, and business team who bring significant artistic, technology and community development skills to Corporate Performance Artists. Joseph, is a graduate of Computer Science from Duke University and a former team leader at IBM. He has been a CEO of several companies, and has been responsible for raising $2 million to fund a startup company called EveryDayPrint.com, which while part of the dot-com boom and bust, he managed to bring to profitability and which still survives to this day.

Donna was an operations manager and PR specialist in the firms they have started together. She has recently been credited by several business leaders in the Bronx as being "top spokesperson for the Bronx." She is active in many community development projects, such as participating on the Board of the Bruckner Arts and Antique District, and working to promote many Bronx activities through an online newsletter called Cupcake Kaleidoscope.

Joseph was the leader of the Open Source Sig for the New York Software Industry Association. And was track co-chair for Open Source at the 2001 New York Software Industry Summit. He was on the advisory board for PostgreSql, Inc - the leading Open Source Database and has had articles published by Lutris Technologies and Open Magazine on Open Source business models and technology solutions. He is a database expert with extensive Fortune 500 experience. Among other awards, he won an IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.

From magazine "Open" issue September 2001 - "The McElroys kick open the doors of old business models and capitalize on what they believe." The McElroys have achieved re-known as Open Source visionaries with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine, and others. Joseph and Donna make no claims of divine insight, but in review by Lewis Lacock, it is said, "that this dynamic duo of art are the closest things we have to true shamans today". They are doing their best to pursue the knowledge to support such claims someday.

HIGHLIGHTS

* Achieved reputation as Open Source visionarys with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine among others.
* National Columnist on Money Matters for Gather.com.
* Judge for the Advanced Technical Categories of the Emmys.
* Successfully raised $2 million funding for startup.
* Successfully built and sold two technology businesses.
* First Entry into the Multimedia wing of the Museum of Computer Art.
* Artwork collected by the Library at Cornell University.
* Artwork in the collection of Rhizome.org.
* Developed first ever Exhibition Catalog completely on CD Rom. Done for Alternative Museum. Reviewed by New York Times.
* Selected to attend first ever Summer Institute for Performance Art at The Kitchen in NYC.
* IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.
* Various academic, mathematic and scholarship awards. Attended Duke University on a full scholarship in mathematics.
* Poetry published in various journals. Art exhibited in museum shows.
* Certificate of Artistic Excellence from Congressman Jose Serrano.
* Recognized by Bronx Borough President Aldofo Carrion for contributions to the community.
Discussions (635) Opportunities (0) Events (3) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: Where is the Rhizome?


I completely disagree with you, I find the emotional context to be
irritating, and I think you should be voted off the island.

A. joseph

A stands for Anonymous not Anarchist or A**hole

Dyske Suematsu wrote:
> I might have argued this several years ago, but the specific characteristics associated with Rhizome RAW are the results of its technological architecture and its policies, which is basically anarchy. Being open to everything and anything does not create or foster diverse and open discussions. Anarchy is simply one of many organizational structures we can have, with its own specific results.
>
> In anarchistic email lists, we often see the pattern of power law where something like the top 5% of members do over 90% of all the talking. And, as you would expect of any anarchistic organizations, what you see on the surface does not represent the majority views. In most anarchistic email lists, those who are most vocal dominate the list and set the course of discussions. Even if their opinions are a small minority, that’s what everyone sees, and naturally everyone comes to associate those opinions with the organization itself.
>
> What is more influential than views and opinions is attitude or tone. Most of us are not capable of seeing arguments solely for their truth values. Emotional content in fact plays a bigger role in deciding to agree or disagree with someone. The small minority of vocal members not only sets the content of the list, but also sets the attitude and tone. This has a snowballing effect of attracting others who share similar attitudes and tones. Eventually, those who cannot relate to the attitudes and tones of the list would leave. The list becomes increasingly homogeneous in this manner, and eventually the remaining members get sick of each other since they are essentially looking at themselves in a mirror. This is expressed in Curt’s list of why’s:
>
> “1. We've already argued about all there is to argue about, and we're tired of arguing about the same things.”
>
> I personally do not like anarchistic structure for an online community. Since the Internet itself has the anarchistic structure, it seems natural to have one, but it can become useless for the same reason. Imagine in a big department store like Macys, a section where it sells everything and anything. Since having a variety of products is the idea of the department store itself, having a section with the same idea is useless. Each online community, I believe, should be more structured. Marisa said: “We can't be all things to all people.” True; trying to be all things to all people ends up serving no one.
>
> A good interviewer would make the interviewee believe that, after a great interview with lots of interesting opinions and stories, he did it all by himself. Free flow of great ideas is usually not so “free”; it only has the facade of freedom. It is actually the invisible structure and control mechanism that lets the ideas flow in a useful and productive manner, which is what a great interviewer does. And this can be controlled with simple technical and/or presentational devices.
>
> As New York Magazine noted once, the online discussion boards at UrbanBaby.com does not display user names. This can cause a lot of confusions because you have no idea who is saying what. But because of the total anonymity, people feel free to say whatever they have on their minds. Some mothers, for instance, started confessing their regrets for having kids. In this way, a simple thing, like the lack of user name, has a big effect on the content and the tone of an online community.
>
> It would be interesting, for instance, to see what happens to Rhizome RAW if there was a simple and easy voting system for each comment posted. Suppose the system automatically kicks out members who get more than 10 lowest votes in a month. Or, it would automatically give more presentational significance to those members who are consistently voted high. I am not saying Rhizome should implement these ideas; I’m only curious as to what would happen if they did. How would it influence the attitudes, tones, and content of the discussion on RAW? It would be interesting to see because it would reflect better what the majority of Rhizome members are thinking and feeling.
>
> People who are not vocal on RAW are not necessarily quiet because they are shy. I believe the number of people who are actually shy is as small as the number of people who are very vocal on the list. The vast majority of the people are more than capable of joining discussions, and offering interesting opinions and insights. What determines their participation is probably more about attitudes and tones than it is about the content.
>
> In email lists where lively discussions still go on, it is usually because the lists are carefully moderated in some way. Discussions on blogs, for instance, are usually moderated and organized by the owners of the blogs. The topic of discussion is set with each post on a blog. This forces everyone to stay on topic, and has the effect of automatically categorizing all the comments. If the topic is interesting, the discussion could go on forever without digressing too far. Or, on popular blogs, discussions are often closed after a certain number of posts, so people do not start arguing about the same thing over and over. In this sense, discussions on blogs are more useful and interesting.
>
> So, in my opinion, the reason why not much is going on within RAW is because its structure is too general and wide open. As the Internet grows in size, each site or community needs to become more specific. Again, the analogy to a department store would be helpful here. The bigger the department store gets, the more specific each section should be. Rhizome RAW simply hasn’t adjusted to that reality.
>
> -Dyske
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> 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
>
>
>

DISCUSSION

Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Where is the Rhizome?


rhizome is old tech and historical artifact, it is not needed in any
other capacity. Example, roll you own now, http://rhizomeraw.ning.com/

joseph

DISCUSSION

Re: is art useless?


The number of replies indicates a passion for this discussion and the
desperate lack of arguments. I would suggest that you have to put both
"useless" and "art" into a limited domain and then butt around in those
walls before you take it universal. In my domain, art serves a purpose.

Joseph Franklyn McElroy

Jim Andrews wrote:
> the notion that art is necessarily useless seems to me an exclusionary
> tactic rather than a compelling argument.
>
> what are some arguments for the position that art is necessarily useless?
>
> ja?
> http://vispo.com
>
>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> 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
>
>
>

--
Joseph Franklyn McElroy
Corporate Performance Artists
www.corporatepa.com

This email message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged communications, work product, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient(s), you are notified that the dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.

DISCUSSION

Re: Re: Re: New on post.thing.net


perhaps it is the logical clearness and ease of use that is problem - I
myself love the lack of linear sequence I get from lists. Having lived
in a world of developing logical, user-friendly interfaces, I am tired
of them. I long for an operating system made like a stack of old papers
and books, where I know where everything is because I put it there and
no one else can find anything without working a bit.
best
joseph

G.H. Hovagimyan wrote:
> gh responds:
> Actually there are several forms of threaded discourse intrinsic to the cms we're using. You can start your own forum or comment on an article or post your own article. The only difference is that it's client pull. What are your objections to these type of structures? Do you prefer a closed discussion that only the initiated may read if they are subscribed to a listserv? In fact, the cms we use is more accessible to the networked world via google searches. The threaded discussions are actually a lot clearer and easier to follow that the traditional email listserv structure. I wonder what you objections might be then. Have you actually taken the time to use the new post.thing.net interface before dismissing it offhand?
>
> annie abrahams wrote:
>
>
>> I am against blogs
>>
>> I am for lists
>>
>> I won't participate, no blog for me.
>> unless a participative blog as the noblog of jim punk (cannot find a
>> link, has it disappeared?
>>
>> I hope other women also will leave the blogs to men and will try to
>> invest lists again
>>
>>
>> best Annie Abrahams
>>
>> On 11/27/06, G.H. Hovagimyan <ghh@thing.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I've taken over the editorship of post.thing.net.
>>>
>> http://post.thing.net I've been inviting people to come and blog.
>> There are many new bloggers joining from around the country and around
>> the world. Some recent bloggers include:
>>
>>> James Allan - England - http://post.thing.net/blog/171
>>> Isabel Arvers - Switzerland - http://post.thing.net/blog/200
>>>
>>> Casper Straeke is reporting on the 4th international Media Art
>>>
>> Biennale Seoul 2006. frontpage- http://post.thing.net
>>
>>> Patrick Lichty has continued his thoughts on Craft and New Media
>>>
>> first presented informally on rhizome. frontpage-
>> http://post.thing.net
>>
>>> The juxtapositon of these two essays is very exciting!
>>>
>>> I would like to extend a special invitation to women bloggers who
>>>
>> would like to become part of this exciting discourse.
>>
>>> Hey! don't let the boy's club just rule things!! Contact me and I'll
>>>
>> set you up with a blog!!
>>
>>> +
>>> -> post: list@rhizome.org
>>> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
>>> -> 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
>>
>> --
>>
>> "FearingS" Participate in creating a collective voice about "fear".
>> Help revealing it's actual tendencies. http://bram.org/peur/fear/
>> "Peurs" Participez � la cr�ation d'une voix collective autour de la
>> "peur". Aidez � en r�v�ler les tendances actuelles.
>> http://bram.org/peur/fear/indexfr.htm
>>
>>
> +
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> 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
>
>
>

--
Joseph Franklyn McElroy
Corporate Performance Artists
www.corporatepa.com

This email message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged communications, work product, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient(s), you are notified that the dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.

DISCUSSION

Re: I have a suggestion for Rhizome...


Sourceforge.net has a good model for open source repository - and the
software that runs sourceforge is available there.

joseph

Lauren Cornell wrote:

>Hi Pall, This is an interesting idea. How do you think such a repository
>could be mapped onto or integrated with the ArtBase as it currently stands?
>Lauren
>
>On 4/3/06 12:03 AM, "Pall Thayer" <p_thay@alcor.concordia.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
>>A short explanation and reasoning follow but the suggestion is for a
>>repository of open-sourced code by artists.
>>
>>More and more, internet-based artwork has come to rely on server-
>>specific technology. Therefore it appears to me (this is based on
>>some very quick browsing) that fewer works are actually being
>>preserved in the Artbase and more projects are simply being linked to
>>from it (as opposed to 'cloned' work). A repository for open-sourced
>>code that is used to run some of these server-specific projects would
>>serve to rekindle the idea of the Artbase as a 'preservative' archive.
>>
>>Such a repository would also serve as an invaluable resource for the
>>sharing and dissemination of knowledge. I would suggest that the code
>>need not be complete and compilable or usable in and of itself. It
>>could be functions or snippets of code as well that could easily be
>>incorporated into a variety of projects (i.e. "Here's a little Perl
>>function I use when I have to scale numbers into a certain range.",
>>etc.).
>>
>>I think that this would be a good move and that it would benefit the
>>community. It would be interesting to hear what others think about it.
>>
>>Pall Thayer
>>
>>--
>>Pall Thayer
>>p_thay@alcor.concordia.ca
>>http://www.this.is/pallit
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>+
>>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>>-> 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
>>
>>
>
>+
>-> post: list@rhizome.org
>-> questions: info@rhizome.org
>-> 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
>
>
>
>