Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Re: New Membership Policy

Dear Lauren,

It is positive that Rhizome recognized its errors of the Past
and tries to stop them before it is too late.

It was not an obscure situation which caused the decline of Rhizome,
but it was basically Rhizome itself, respectively the responsables for it
which did not analyse and realize the situation properly,
and this error does generally not speak for professionalism,
nor any vision behind Rhizome.

In free economy or a "real" community,
the members would have forced the responsables to retire.

The current plans for the member fee and the lack of any substantial professional services
which would eventually justify such a fee, speak for themselves.

I actually doubt, that Rhizome was analysing its decline properly now either,
because some controverse points remain in form of
the Artbase, which represents generally an unpleasant subject.

Even if Rhizome started the Artbase, the art works posted there do not represent
its private property, but the property of the artists or the owners of the works, of course.
It does not speak for Rhizome, when it does not show any respect against the artists and
a new form of contemporary art, which is not widely accepted, yet, as such,
when it installs a system, which just prevents any chance to change this situation,
instead of looking for the largest audience possible in order to support and promote this new art form.

My personal policy as an artist and creator of netart works is to give all interested people
free und unrestricted access to my works,
and I expect the same, as well, from those who represent "so called" my interests.

It represents really not my interest that my works vanish in some obsure Archives
and people have only restricted access, have to pay a fee or what ever.
Why all that counterproductive stuff?

I am sure, Rhizome will revise also this new strategy, but if it will not do so,
I mean already soon, I would not be able to see Rhizome any longer as a serious partner,
but one who is continuously violating not only my, but generally artists' interests,
and would consequently remove all my 14 netart works
which are currently included in the Artbase.

Sincerely,

Wilfried Agricola de Cologne
**********************

Lauren Cornell wrote:

>Hi Chris,
>
>What I meant by that statement was that the rate of subscriptions to our
>mailing lists had been declining for a long time, as was the rate of
>people signing up to be new members and using the site and our services.
>So, while it may not necessarily be a sink or swim moment, the urgency to
>make a change that would spur Rhizome's long-term growth was very real.
>
>As Rhizome is very active, perhaps its hard to see those statistics on the
>front end. Rachel Greene watched the declining figures over a long period
>of time and they were what prompted her to develop the change in
>membership - which Francis, Kevin and I worked very hard to implement.
>
>Our hope is that our current constituents will benefit from a more open
>system - one that allows the organization to broaden its base of
>participants - not just paying participants, but anyone who is interested
>in knowing more about new media art and utilizing Rhizome as a resource.
>
>Another factor in the change, which was mentioned in the individual
>letters to Members, is that the $5 inhibits Rhizome from keeping pace with
>the net. Removing the $5 will hopefully allow us to make other changes
>that will keep us evolving. On that note, we would be happy to share any
>upcoming changes - significant or not so - with you for debate.
>
>I hope that provides a satisfactory answer to your question.
>
>Thanks,
>Lauren
>
>
>
>>Dear Lauren,
>>
>>You state:
>>aEoeaE