Pall Thayer
Since the beginning
Works in Greenwich, Connecticut United States of America

Pall Thayer is an artist.
Discussions (777) Opportunities (2) Events (4) Jobs (0)

Re: Membership fee?

An annual fee is fine. I would be willing to pay up to say $15. But what
about access to the Artbase? I think that should remain free. I think some
of us who have work in the Artbase look at it as sort of a venue for our
work. I for one get lot's of hits on my site from Rhizome and am concerned
about what might happen if only paying members were allowed access to the
Artbase. And yes, I think Raw should be free. I think it attracts a lot of
curious people who just want to find out what the new media art scene is
about or up to and I doubt that they're willing to pay for it.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Tribe" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:34 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Membership fee?

> Hi Rhizomers:
> I am hoping to start a discussion here on Raw about Rhizome's financial
> situation and a possible solution. This email is rather long, but I'd
> appreciate it if you'd take the time to read it through, give it some
> thought, and let me know what you think.
> First, some background information. It will cost about $400,000 to operate
> this year. Here's how we spend it: $6,000 on administrative
> fees (mostly processing credit card gifts); $122,000 on operating expenses
> (phone, rent, web hosting, office supplies, etc.); $177,000 on payroll
> costs (salaries, health insurance, payroll taxes, etc.); $93,000 on
> professional fees (writers, commissions, consultants, etc.). These numbers
> may seem high to some of you, but we actually run a very lean, efficient
> operation. It simply costs a lot of money to run a nonprofit organization
> that offers as many programs to as many people as we do.
> In the past, most of our revenue has come from foundations, but foundation
> support is shrinking. We had hoped to make up the difference through
> income from web hosting and online education, but those services are
> getting off to a slow start. We have also, as you surely know, tried
> for voluntary contributions. But so far this year only about 1% of our
> 19,000 members have made gifts.
> The Rhizome Board of Directors met for its quarterly meeting last Friday.
> The main topic was how to solve our financial problems. I proposed putting
> the organization into hibernation mode. This would entail shutting down
> office, laying off the staff and discontinuing most of our programs. We
> would keep the web site up, ask the SuperUsers to continue to publish
> texts, and keep Raw online. But everything else would stop: no more Digest
> or Net Art News, no more commissions, no more events. We'd stop adding new
> projects to the ArtBase, stop improving the web site (we have a long list
> of bugs to fix and features to add) and stop planning new programs.
> The Board felt that hibernation would be a big mistake. Once we went into
> hibernation, they argued, it would be very hard to re-emerge and rebuild
> momentum. Foundations would lose confidence in us (not to mention the fact
> that we wouldn't have anyone to write the grants). Most important, our
> ability to fulfill our mission would be compromised.
> Then someone suggested charging a membership fee. This idea has been
> proposed before, and I have always opposed it. Rhizome is for everyone, I
> argued, not just for those who can afford it. I argued that we'd lose
> thousands of members and that our community would become less diverse.
> Then we looked at the numbers. The gap between our expenses and what we
> raise from foundations, the government, earned income and other sources is
> about $100,000. That's about $5 per member. If every member gave $5,
> Rhizome would be financially stable. We could continue to grow and serve
> the community.
> The board argued that we pay to subscribe to magazines, to enter museums
> and to see performances. We pay to attend festivals and conferences. Why
> shouldn't we pay for Rhizome? Because it's online?
> Consider this hypothetical scenario. Let's say we introduced a
> sliding-scale membership fee starting at $11 per year with "thank you
> gifts" (T-shirts, etc.) at higher levels. By paying $11 a year (or more if
> you could afford it), you get access to everything: Raw, Rare, Digest, Net
> Art News, the Calendar, Opportunity Listings, ArtBase, Commissions, etc.
> Maybe we'd keep Raw free. Maybe we'd give new memebers a free trial period
> so they could check out the goods before they have to pay.
> Would you pay the fee?
> What do you think about the idea of a sliding-scale membership fee for
> Good idea? Bad idea?
> Do you think it would be better to go into hibernation?
> I am eagerly awaiting your responses.
> Sincerely,
> Mark
> + new media rugby
> -> post:
> -> questions:
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> -> give:
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at


online multi-user interactive sound experience

Looking for the new universal harmony" has some new sounds to it.

LNUH is a multi-user, interactive project on the web that explores abstract=
imagery via a sound interface, simultaneous multi-user involvement and use=
rs IP numbers.

Please feel free to send me feedback.

Pall Thayer
Pall Thayer
Fjolbrautaskolinn vid Armula (


Re: kch (fwd)

Now he's going to tell us he doesn't have knees. Only masochistic
murderous apes have knees.

Hinn 16.10.2002 kl. 21:04 ritadhi neil jenkins:

>>> hihi. super cool. im ur biggest fan !!!
>> Avoid sending me personal off-list e-mail. Thank you.
> ditto myopic egotistical knee-jerk
> + imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ?
> -> post:
> -> questions:
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> -> give:
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at
Pall Thayer
Fjolbrautaskolanum vidh Armula (


Re: Joseph the Mountaian Sensei-Master

Now you too can reach the same heights of existence as IID42 for the low low
price of $19.95... It only takes 8
minutes and it's fully guaranteed!

Get QUALIFIED today!

----- Original Message -----
From: "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <>
To: <>
Cc: <>; <thingist@BBS.THING.NET>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 7:38 PM
Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: Joseph the Mountaian Sensei-Master

> Atheletes develop strong bodies (practicioners of heiho), and if the
> techniques and exercises of budo are practiced rigorously, a strong body
> will develop just as does an athlethe's.
> (Takes a look at joseph's body-right).
> But budo is not heiho / athletics. Physical strength must never be used
> in budo. Only ki is used. The strength of the human body is limited, the
> power of ki is limitless. The use of ki cannot be taught, but it can be
> learned by those who fight the battle within.
> 'Mountain' state is 'symbolic' of a zen-master state, that is one who has
> conquered himself, all of his weaknesses and self-delusions, and has
> overcome his human-ness.
> Dogen you are not.
> In fact Joseph's life-force is very small. He's rigid, inflexible, and
> brutish. Secondly, Joseph lacks proper capability to orgasm which is
> standard of asleep sexual force, and without such awakening there is no
> development to a state of fluid, conscious and vital ki.
> His idiotic and psychotic wishful thinking about my 'fear and hatred' of
> him is little but the tactic of a cowardly dog who lacks power, and who
> thinks that mental tricks would psyche-out his opponent, paired with
> spasmodic twitching, and attempts to salvage his self-importance in
> public. Nevermind that he fancies himself a percieved 'enemy'--even though
> it has been made abundantly clear that nobody is attacking him.
> The depiction of his state is simply a 'portrait'--and I paint it as is.
> I neither like nor dislike Joseph, yet he's a useful example of the kind
> of idiot who damages others, and who is unfortunately become the udulated
> 'hero' in the face of disappearance of proper spiritual traditions.
> The other point of the portrait is this: that this kind of behavior is not
> powerful, not knowledgeable, and not life. It is the behavior of a man who
> is impotent to PERCEIVE so he must claw at the 'masks' of others. The
> realization that one wears a mask is certainly one of the first steps
> to conscious evolution. The next step is not 'dropping the mask and baring
> your soul' however, and this psychotic trend is completely stupid.
> The world proper (not human) is not short in Beings who'd love to feed
> on human essense-energy (as it is one of the: purest energies), and one
> is not given this essence so one may piss it away. The 'mask' is a
> necessity--and the proper form of evolution is to SEE behind the mask
> (which is quite feasible), for those for whom this is possible.
> For the REST the soul which each human carries is to remain HIDDEN.
> Nobody owes anybody to reveal, show and otherwise make available its
> soul or any part of itself. It is a personal and private business. For
> that matter, nobody owes not anybody ELSE not a whit of their privacy at
> all. AT ALL.
> When a human chooses to appear in public, in a responsible manner, it is
> up to the individual human to determine how, to what extent, in what
> manner, and how much of itself it is to reveal. In a situation of
> responsible adults, anyone else would naturally simply feel honored
> and blessed at another's presence--in whatever 'minimal' form it may be.
> Critique is idiotic nonsense. One can either assist or not assist.
> Those who can assist are very few--and while I'm not indicating
> discouragement of seeking assistance, advice, help or conversations,
> this posing of *I'm a shaman' *I'm influenced by Sufism* etc etc.
> is drivel. One is neither a shaman, nor a sufi, nor a gnostic christian,
> nor any of this stuff being thrown around if one is a. not awakened b.
> not in direct contact with a 'school' or 'teacher' who is transmitting
> energetic material (and Im not implying human teachers necessarily).
> All else is kaput. Wishes, fantasies. 'Dreams'. While i am also not
> discouraging anyone to pursue such interests, the achievement of such
> 'titles' are not trivial. They area pplicable to beings who HAVE done
> work, who ARE awake / evolved, not just to any idiot who is 'fascinated
> by' for whatever reasons-career, he saw another monkey do it,
> self-aggrandizement, etc.
> On the subjects of 'power' and 'knowledge' and Truth--they certainly
> exist in an absolute sense, in fact your average human's 'existence'
> is far more emphimeral than those. The reactionary knee-jerkisms
> to the former two are thproughly revealing of many of the posters
> egotistical, diseases, jealous, self-important natures, as well as of your
> pathetic ignorance on such matters and their true nature.
> Neither power nor knowledge are made available to egotistical
> self-important twits who 'cling' to them as if they're property.
> Power in particular would destroy any such imbecile.
> Secondly, vital energy, vital strength and self-discipline are
> a life-necessity for all humans. This is not brute force. This is not
> aggression. Refusal to tolerate crap is not a 'clenched fist'--
> never has been, nor will it be. The cultivation of ki in whatever form (I
> am not advocating all run out and become japanese / chinese) is VITAL.
> On THESE lists what the majority of posters do is debase others,
> attempt to constrict and cut off ki circulation, and cripple any
> human unfortunate enough to has started any sort of development.
> This is all passed on under the guise of 'dialogue' 'discourse'
> 'critique' and hell--'performance art'.
> A very large section of posters 'stay quiet' or form little 'elite groups'
> where they stick together and defend each other, huddled in their sleep.
> Rather the opposite of david blah's post, my presence can only be
> threatening to idiots who want to pretend that they are 'important'
> things they are not. And by the way his plea for anycopyright because he
> wants to deface corporate logos, is driven by the same impulse that
> causes one to 'claw' at masks--he wants appropriation of power that is not
> his. Logos are in many aspects derived from 'shields' 'crests' and various
> other similar 'masking' devices, and the REAL IMPULSE is to shatter the
> shield. This is all good and fine if it were directed towards 'the
> narcissistic mirror of self-reflection,' but in ever is. Cause the problem
> is never with ONE, it's always somebody else's fault. Nevermind that this
> gets transferred to the reproductive / fucking impulses and women are
> forthe most part 'shields' or mirrors, so this murderous impulse gets
> transferred to them.
> Sanity is not expected however.
> The kind of 'honesty' that you attempt to preach does not exist.
> It's merely an attempt to SLOT humans and tag them with an easy label.
> The pathetic weakness of an ape who cannot deal with reality, and seeks
> security, which in turn manifests as psychotic control mechanisms.
> What you want is not HONESTY. You want a flat, simple, predictable,
> familiar IDENTITY with which the human is to IDENTIFY WITH. *Oh him
> / her*. The figured out human. The one with the 'personal quirks and
> weaknesses' that somehow make him / her appear less threatening.
> Certainly NOT one who doesn't HAVE any because that'll be a reminder
> of your own state, and that one must work to overcome these things,
> not pretend that they're ornamental jewelry. A weak and 'quirky'
> human is controllable. Safe. Asleep. A strong, aware nd conscious
> Being is not 'predictable'. Not 'controllable'. Never twice the same.
> Never familiar. Connected to the source of knowledge, and to degrees
> available to its being omniscient. Autonomous. And among other things
> free. But that is not 'interesting'. A human victim twitching in its
> trap--be it anger, or making a mistake due to sleep-state, attachment
> and preferably DYING etc. is FAR MORE INTERESTING. Far from artistic
> sensibility, intelligence, and talent, this kind of behavior is informed
> by idiotic stupor and a morbid sado-masochistic pornographic murder
> impulse. This does not come from one capable of genuinely enjoying Self,
> Life, and others, and capable of creation.
> The reality of the matter is that in FACT I am not wearing a mask in this
> situation because I am capable of doing so in public for some periods of
> time and protecting myself. What you are SCREAMINg about is that I AM NOT
> A MASK. Because were I A MASK, and IDENTITY, you would know how to relate.
> You'd know which holes to look for, and which buttons to push. What makes
> 'me' tick. The truly sad thing is that your so-elated 'human' contacts
> are rarely joyous. You always seek to relate to another through its
> 'weakness' or 'pain'--and when you don't find any you're BENT on hurting
> the other human in order to 'teach life'. Some of you even have the gal to
> claim that they engage in this sadism 'out of compassion (Max Herman,
> Peter von Brandenburg).' Compassion is the ability to transform another's
> pain into 'love'--that is to heal. This is available to awakened
> individuals mostly as well, although I've had the pleasure of encoyntering
> some who doit unconsciously due to 'special' forces working through them.
> Slapping people around like a butcher with flat stereotypical projections
> is not 'compassionate'. Not only that but it strengthens the 'human'
> masochistic impulse (hit me, I deserve it).
> As is, when writing to 'me', you're screaming at a void, and projecting
> all sort of imnecilities. You are not trying to UNMASK me. You are trying
> to DICTATE A MASK TO ME. This is what you WANT. AN IDENTITY.
> And this my dearest 'all' is driven by ego. Nothing else.
> So take a good look at yourselves.
> `, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
> + don't be cool
> -> post:
> -> questions:
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> -> give:
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at


Re: language is the game+nediocre 'not literary' criticizm

Back up to your old plagiarising tricks again
( ). I looked up a
few of your posts around the net and noticed that you do alot of this
stuff. I guess it can be pretty tough thinking up smart sounding stuff
to say by oneself. Especially when you're on an entirely different
evolutionary plane than most of us, like you. Oh, don't tell me, I'm not
qualified to say such things. Well, I think I may have met some friends
of yours in Roswell, NM a few years ago and they gave me the special
visitors pass so I'm qualified every fifth month of every third year
provided that the stars are correctly aligned. A small spot in my brain
starts to quiver around that time. I think it's from the implant.

Hinn 12.10.2002 kl. 19:30 ritadhi -IID42 Kandinskij @27+:

> + othermiscellanea 'art' observations by the very.dense Eryk Salvaggio
> who only recognizes art if it's a think-dog wearing an 'art' tag
> around
> itz tail
> Many theater historians and critics label Alfred Jarry's French play,
> Ubu
> Roi as the earliest example of Theatre of the Absurd. Absurdism also has
> origins in Shakespearean drama, particularly through the influence of
> the
> Commedia dell'Arte.
> The current movement of absurdism, however, emerged in France after
> World
> War II, as a rebellion against the traditional values and beliefs of
> Western culture and literature.
> Its rules are fairly simple:
> 1.) There is often no real story line; instead there is a series of
> "free
> floating repetitive images" which influence the way in which an audience
> interprets a play.
> 2.) There is a focus on the incomprehensibility of the world, or an
> attempt to rationalize an irrational, disorderly world.
> 3.) Language acts as a barrier to communication, which in turn isolates
> the individual even more, thus making speech almost futile.
> + tripe
Pall Thayer
Fjolbrautaskolanum vidh Armula (