Muserna Muserna
Since the beginning
Works in New York, New York United States of America

Discussions (78) Opportunities (0) Events (2) Jobs (0)

Re: I am scared max.

All who are themselves say "I"



( 0 0) <- Ever seen a bucktooth dino with hair?
}. .{ Don't laugh, but you have now.
`-' Goofy Dinos only at:

on 8/23/02 2:48 AM, ecrit :

> In a message dated 8/23/2002 12:55:29 AM Central Daylight Time,
> writes:
>> Max am i the only real person in here?
>> Do you pretend to be all these other people?
>> I am scared max.
> I'm scared too. I only ever post or do work under my regler name.
> Muserna is not me, and several people can verify. Maybe don't worry so much?
> I don't know who Zaphod is. I am not Judson.
> ++


Re: Compliance, Trust, and Brand Value: NUNGU

on 8/22/02 9:14 PM, ecrit :

> First off, the DMCA makes it illegal to defame someone professionally in a
> "chat room" so Rawlley can be sued just for posting here. I consider her
> broaching the topic to be risky on her part. What role the Gagosian Gallery
> has here, if any, none, who knows.

So when I D.D.D. ( defame / deface / destroy***) Unos on Sept 10-11 will it be illegal?

(**vamos a pelear y luchar como hermanos, el es mi hermano del otro lado del
rio pero de la misma sangre - y el lo sabe)

I don't care, I gonna done D.D.D. him anyhow!

-Cross-bones style too!!!

Which reminds me-- you know who I'd really like to get in the ring with me
in the WWWF?
(World-Wide Web Wrestling Federation) Take a guess...


( 0 0) <- Ever seen a bucktooth dino with hair?
}. .{ Don't laugh, but you have now.
`-' Goofy Dinos only at:


Re: Compliance, Trust, and Brand Value: NUNGU

on 8/22/02 9:14 PM, ecrit :

> First off, the DMCA makes it illegal to defame someone professionally in a
> "chat room" so Rawlley can be sued just for posting here.

Vishall probably doesn't have a lawyer and was probably not thinking about
going to court, -but if Vishall does have a lawyer then perhaps he should
consult him/her before posting again.

Anyhow - if Vishall feels his statements to be the truth then he should
state them publicly.(and if taken to court by Gagosian or Bea, and Vishall
still doesn't have a lawyer then Vishall can, if proven sane, testify for
himself.) With that said I think Vishall's statements are, in a sense, his
public testimony of what he perceives is the truth.

> I suppose we can relatively safely
> comment from the relative safety of our artistic merit.

Word: Artistic merit has nothing to do with opinions regarding this
situation. If ones art is "visual" and he expresses himself "verbally" and
sounds like flat crap that's not reason enough to discredit their visual
artistic merit.

In Matisse's prelude to "Notes d'une Peintre" 1908, (Red Room fans forgive
me for paraphrasing), Matisse begs people to be gentle on him if he should
say something stupid since the world of words is not his forte, and the
first an most important comment he can say is in his paintings.

> I might be offline for a few days, moving and all.

Goodluck w/that. And wear a belt, bust your back like I did and it's over.


( 0 0) <- Ever seen a bucktooth dino with hair?
}. .{ Don't laugh, but you have now.
`-' Goofy Dinos only at:



>> In a message dated 8/22/2002 10:12:31 AM Central Daylight Time,
>> writes:
>> nungu and its founder saddens me.
>> I would like to affirm that Bea is an artist and individual of great
>> integrity and I am alarmed at any individual who would try to question
>> this. I hope that you can ignore claims that belittle what has always been
>> a discursive and intellectually collaborative site.
>> Yours sincerely,
>> Laura Bartlett
>> Gagosian Gallery

> Then on 8/22/02 5:02 PM, ecrit :
> I'd rather explore than ignore.
> So if the other person--Rawlley?--is still onlist, I'd listen to more, and
> object if you were kicked offlist. However it doesn't seem cut and dried.
> Anyone else please comment on this? Rachel?

Laura, Max, Vishal, Members of Rhizome_Raw email list,
Hello all, although there is no real art-police on Rhizome, your decision to
bring this matter before our wise and thoughtful memebers, (albeit a rather
eccentric community of digizens), has been the right decision since this
email list is a good place to begin the probing into the details of the past
incidents/accusation regarding the Beatrice (a.k.a. Bea) and the
scandal that surrounds it.

With that said, Laura Bartlett, I am unfortunate to say that I am agree with
max Herman that the "ignoring" of information regarding this incident
whether it proves false in the end is a rather ignorant thing to suggest we
all should do. (max - what's a Latin or Greek cliche for ignorance?)

Now getting to the point, or at least the point that I understand, is that
Gungu is a collaborative website which invites artist
to make work, such as "Mrs. Jeevan Jham"[mrs.%20jeevam%20jham]
and "Masala_x"[masala_x]/
Both of which Vishal Rawlley is claiming was her idea.)

Now Rhizome has given Bea a grant for the collective and Bea has decide to
take the money and run, leaving other other contributors without a piece of
pie (I am presuming the contributors are the main artistic force behind
nungu, where as Bea is the founder, supportor, money, server space etc,
publicity, and what not). Which is why Vishall feels cheated out of the
grant money and more importantly artistic credit.

If that's the case then:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Either Rhizome should reconsider the grant and investigate the facts and
decide who Nungu really is and how the moeny shall be doled out in order for
the project to continue.


Bea gives the artist credit for collaborations and divides the grant money
appropriately. (dividing the money at this point might be moot now that one
claimed "core" member of the collective upset, the basic fabric of nungu
might cease to exist, therefor forfeiting the money altogether.)

Any other options or facts to be placed on the table?


( 0 0) <- Ever seen a bucktooth dino with hair?
}. .{ Don't laugh, but you have now.
`-' Goofy Dinos only at:

--------- ORIGINAL EMAIL BELOW BY Vishal Rawlley ----------

( 0-0 )

The Selection Committee
Rhizome&#8217;s Net Art Commissions 2002

Re: The grant awarded to Beatrice Gibson of

Respected Board Members,

This is to bring to your notice that Miss Beatrice Gibson of in
her grant application to Rhizome has faked facts with the willful intent to
cheat the grant authorities and has thus been awarded the grant on a false

Beatrice Gibson (a British citizen based in Mumbai since year 2000)
functions as a curator/ editor of and pays for its server space
and other infrastructure. was offered as a free online space to
artists and media creators to host online projects. A collective of artists
&#8211; most of whom are Indian nationals based in Mumbai &#8211;
contributed to since its inception in September 2000 till March
2001. The collective has since disbanded.

I have been a contributor to as an artist since its inception in
September 2000 till February this year. Since August 2001 till February
2002, the &#8216;nungu collective&#8217; consisted of me and Miss Gibson
alone. During this period all art projects hosted on have been my
contributions, namely &#8216;Masala_x and &#8216;Mrs. Jeevan Jham&#8217;.

Miss Gibson has never individually contributed a single project to the
oeuvre of &#8216;nungu projects&#8217; till date. She has, however, been a
collaborator on some projects only in the capacity of a logistical
coordinator and assistant graphic designer. Yet she has made false claims
and taken undue credit in her proposal application to Rhizome (see:[update[02] ) which I enumerate below:

1. Miss Gibson in her application proposes to build on an existing
project entitled Mrs. Jeevan Jham. I feel deeply violated as this is
completely my project in conception and design. I have sufficient proof and
witnesses to confirm this. I reserve the right to continue work on this
project and have never granted permission to anyone to build on it. It was a
work-in-progress when I severed my ties with nungu in February this year.
Miss Gibson has wrongly appropriated this work as her own and hence her
proposal to Rhizome is completely illegitimate.

2. Miss Gibson has applied for the grant to Rhizome as a
&#8216;collective of artists&#8217; and the grant is supposedly to benefit
this collective. However, in reality this collective did not exist at the
time Miss Gibson applied for the grant and now Miss Gibson is the sole
beneficiary of the grant. The grant application attempts to hide this fact.

3. In the resume attached to the grant proposal, Miss Gibson has
willfully deleted any trace of other contributors to No
individual names are mentioned except hers. She has thus attempted to
deceitfully imply that she is single-handedly responsible for the entire
&#8216;nungu project&#8217;. Even her resume and nungu&#8217;s resume are
written concurrently. But in actual fact, she has never individually
authored a single project hosted on

I have made Miss Gibson aware about the complaints against her. She has
accepted that the omission of individual names from the resume and in other
places on the website is a serious mistake. She has since sent me a detailed
credit list with all individuals correctly credited; except that she has
falsely credited herself in all places. She is still incorrectly implying
that she was a &#8216;collaborating artist&#8217; on projects where she
simply acted as a &#8216;coordinator&#8217; or as &#8216;assistant graphic
designer&#8217;. She also wrongly continues to claim that &#8216;Mrs. Jeevan
Jham&#8217; was co-authored by her along with me. This is not true and even
if it were, she still has no right to individually start building on
something which she singularly doesn&#8217;t own and without informing or
asking the permission of the co-author/s.

I am deeply distressed and feel completely exploited. I was contributing to
nungu without pay as an independent artist and the projects I contributed
are personal projects that have been developed at my own time and expense. I
am writing to you with the sincere hope that you shall be able to help me
secure my right to continue work on a project which is in fact mine. If my
charges are not addressed/ redressed, I could easily come across as a
disgruntled and jealous person making an unnecessary hue and cry. Thus by
writing to you I am taking the great risk of putting my personal honor and
reputation at stake. I believe that you shall be understanding and just in
your opinion. If you need any further details or clarifications from my end
I shall be most willing to provide it. Thank you.

Vishal Rawlley



on 8/22/02 9:18 PM, ecrit :

> George Bush

Can't you go to prison for pretending to be the president?