Hi everybody,
The voting for the 2005-2006 Rhizome Net Art Commissions is now
underway. If you are eligible to vote, please go to
http://rhizome.org/commissions/voting/ to vote for your favorite
proposals.
This is the second year we have used this process, and last year it
went off without a hitch. My only major problem with last year was that
voter turnout was sort of low, so please spend some time to evaluate
the applicants' proposals and let your vote be counted. After all, this
is not another silly online poll. Your vote will have a genuine effect
on the decisions regarding who will be awarded … so if you care at
all about the proposals you like, and the art you like, getting a
commission, please take the time to vote!
I have emailed all the candidates, and asked them:
+ not to participate in list discussion on any of the work under
consideration.
+ not to change their proposal sites during the discussion in an
attempt to win more votes.
For everyone else, please remember to be polite in discussing the
submissions. We want people to talk openly about the proposals, but we
also have to keep in mind that in any open call like this, you're going
to get proposals that vary in quality. So please accentuate the
positive. We want this to be a pleasant experience for every artist who
submits a proposal.
Thanks in advance for participating. And please email me if you have
any questions about how this whole thing is supposed to work.
Francis Hwang
Director of Technology
Rhizome.org
phone: 212-219-1288x202
AIM: francisrhizome
+ + +
Rhizome Commissions: Voting starts
-
Type: discussion
Comments
Also, one note: We started the voting a little later than planned, so
there has been a slight change in schedule. This round of voting will
last until Monday, April 4, not Friday, April 1, as originally planned.
So y'all have exactly one week to get in your votes for this first
round.
If you want to know more about the voting schedule or process, please
check http://rhizome.org/commissions/voting/ .
Francis Hwang
Director of Technology
Rhizome.org
phone: 212-219-1288x202
AIM: francisrhizome
+ + +
hello.
hmmm,
just gone through the submissions for this years commissions. I would be interested to
know what proportion of the submissions people approve….??
I must have approved about 6
does that make me discerning or arch-bitch - (rhetorical - I know:).
I tried to look at as much and be as fair as possible but I admit after the first 15 anything
with the word "mapping" or whose abstract looked like it had been written by curt's
"market-o-matic" went into auto-no. *yawn*
how about you?
jess.
Jess Loseby wrote:
> hello.
> hmmm,
> just gone through the submissions for this years commissions. I would
> be interested to
> know what proportion of the submissions people approve….??
>
> I must have approved about 6
>
> does that make me discerning or arch-bitch - (rhetorical - I know:).
>
> I tried to look at as much and be as fair as possible but I admit
> after the first 15 anything
> with the word "mapping" or whose abstract looked like it had been
> written by curt's
> "market-o-matic" went into auto-no. *yawn*
>
> how about you?
> jess.
I 'saw' them all too
and had the same kind of reaction
finally said 'yes' to 6 propositions , same as you.
annie abrahams
You must have missed this line in Francis' announcement:
"…please accentuate the positive."
So I've taken the liberty to rephrase your post:
Jess Loseby wrote:
> hello.
> hmmm,
> just gone through the submissions for this years commissions. I would be interested to
> know what proportion of the submissions people approve….??
fine
>
> I must have approved about 6
fine
>
> does that make me discerning or arch-bitch - (rhetorical - I know:).
The commissions being offered are of significant value so I set my
standards quite high.
>
> I tried to look at as much and be as fair as possible but I admit after the first 15 anything
> with the word "mapping" or whose abstract looked like it had been written by curt's
> "market-o-matic" went into auto-no. *yawn*
There are a lot of proposals, many of which present certain trends
within the field. Unfortunately, due to the abundance of proposals, I
was forced to limit my time and resources to those that managed to spark
my interest immediately within the abstract. All that work made me sleepy.
>
> how about you?
> jess.
>
>
> +
> -> 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
_______________________________
Note to self:
If I ever submit to Rhizome's commissions, make sure the title begins
with an "A". Preferably two "A"'s. Something like "Aaron".
Pall Thayer wrote:
> You must have missed this line in Francis' announcement:
> "…please accentuate the positive."
>
> So I've taken the liberty to rephrase your post:
>
> Jess Loseby wrote:
>
>> hello.
>> hmmm,
>> just gone through the submissions for this years commissions. I would
>> be interested to know what proportion of the submissions people
>> approve….??
>
> fine
>
>>
>> I must have approved about 6
>
> fine
>
>>
>> does that make me discerning or arch-bitch - (rhetorical - I know:).
>
> The commissions being offered are of significant value so I set my
> standards quite high.
>
>>
>> I tried to look at as much and be as fair as possible but I admit
>> after the first 15 anything with the word "mapping" or whose abstract
>> looked like it had been written by curt's "market-o-matic" went into
>> auto-no. *yawn*
>
> There are a lot of proposals, many of which present certain trends
> within the field. Unfortunately, due to the abundance of proposals, I
> was forced to limit my time and resources to those that managed to spark
> my interest immediately within the abstract. All that work made me sleepy.
>
>>
>> how about you?
>> jess.
>>
>>
>> +
>> -> 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
_______________________________
Hi Pall,
> You must have missed this line in Francis' announcement:
> "…please accentuate the positive."
>
> So I've taken the liberty to rephrase your post:
Well you can (and you did:) in the same way I could rename this thread "knee-jerk
reaction" but that wouldn't be fair eh?
I think I spent about 11/2 hours looking through the submission which I think is about
right at this stage in the selection for one who is an member but not "super". I yawned
at the use texts in many of abstracts not at the amount of them. I did find there was an
overt preference to mapping projects which I don't think reflects a trend within the field
but a tendency to repeat successful projects. This helped me to limit my attention to
abstracts/ websites which suggested innovative or new ways of working. The six I
selected, in my view, did.
I'm not being negative, I just wondered about the selection process of other users, and
wether my arch-bitch tendencies had made me overtly critical as I was surprised that I
only supported 6. Annie's post suggested not - yours suggests yes, I guess.
K?
jess.
>
Hi all,
Another thing. Some have pointed out to me that some of the proposals
in the pool don't really meet the requirements in the CFP. We hope
everybody who's voting will pay attention to the issue of whether each
proposal actually met the requirements, particularly:
+ these commissions are intended to fund (in whole or in part) new
works or new elaborations of/additions to existing work.
+ these commissions are intended for internet art.
Admittedly, these distinctions can be fuzzy at times, so just use your
best judgment.
We haven't done any screening of the proposals up to this point. But
after this stage of voting is done, we reserve the right to disqualify
proposals if we think they haven't met the minimum requirements of the
CFP.
Feel free to email me if you have any questions about this.
Francis Hwang
Director of Technology
Rhizome.org
phone: 212-219-1288x202
AIM: francisrhizome
+ + +