[-empyre-] clarifying: a reply...

first off, i am struck but how [estranged/strained] the tone of sum of these [distributed/decentralized] + interwoven hyperthreads has become...

first on...

On Jun 8, 2005, at 5:23 PM, Chris Ashley wrote:
>All right, hold on- I don't know whether you intend it
>but I'm wondering if I hear "you people."

i rilly don't know what that means except that you are 01 of the invited guest [participants/discussants] + that for reasons that are fairly unclear to me there seems to be a social performance of culture clash going on wherein blogging is being positioned as fundamentally {different|separated} from participating in lists. perhaps this supposed + i think relatively ungrounded distinction started b/c of posts on this list but it seems to be in an intensely recursive feedBack loop, circling through + constricting conversations across these interconnected interwebs.

>I hope I'm
>not being accused of being a rude or ingrateful guest.

i didn't state that. i believe you be participating very deeply + w/a clear + optimistic intent.

rather than accusing you of being a rude or ungrateful (which, again, i did not do), i pointed out a simple + obvious situation. On Jun 8, 2005, at 11:20 AM, Tom Moody wrote "Feel free to join in, it's easy and fun!" about the discussion that was happening about this discussion elseware, i.e. on Tom Moody's blog. i have been following that discussion + all of the invited guest [participants/discussants], i.e. abe linkoln, jimpunk, yourself + Tom Moody have all posted or commented in that conversation. i thought it odd that participating in that conversation on Moody's blog was being positioned (by Moody) as being "easy and fun!" in potential contrast to participating in the conversation via this list.

>I'd like to remove myself from the middle of some
>supposed "us vs. them," which is not where I've been
>operating from these first few days of June on empyre.

thats cool Chris. i think the "us vs. them" binary is almost totally nonfunctional + usually very destructive.

>And I apoligize to list members who have no idea what
>this is all about.

yes, perhaps this is becoming too meta level, but then again the meta leveling began almost immediately w/the first posts by sum of the guests this month.

>I joined empyre for the month of June as an invited
>guest who agreed to discuss weblogs and art with the

+ to echo others who have already posted sumThin along these lines, i previously looked + currently continue to look fwd to the month + the conversations.

>The four invited panelists, including myself, are not some
>united front.  We're all independent.

i don't doubt you @ all about not being a united front. it is however important to remember that abe linkoln + jimpunk collaborate on SCREENFULL. it is also important to note that sum sort of blog vs list orientation is @ play or is being performed on + off again @ various intersections of these hyperthreads.

>Whether or not there has been some side discussion on
>Tom's weblog doesn't have anything to do with my
>continued participation here.

clearly your participation here is sustaiined, deep + engaged. also, sideTalk can always be important + vital + not mutually exclusive to any other form of participation.

Moody's "easy and fun!" comment caught my attention b/c this perhaps implied a critique of or an opposition to empyre. also, the conversation on that aspect of Moody's blog includes sum analysis of empyre by those that are currently here [in/on] empyre as guests + also anonymous (guests) of Moody's blog. so these interwoven threads are of interest to me + possibly the list in that they intersect w/conversations, participation or potential absences from empyre this month.

personally i <3 it when networked discourses xpost, crisscross, crosswire + potentially short circuit. in fact, that kind of interest is @ the heart of the [blog as art/art as blog] project i recently did on 2005.01.05, called "(19) ++ 77 codewords, metatags + searchterms". the uri is: http://netbehaviouralist.blogspot.com

>If people ask questions, and I have something to say, then I'll gladly
>participate.  That's what I agreed to.

cool. i personally posted sum Q's for you previously + have been engaging the conversation here on empyre in variable ways + styles for awhile now.

>I don't speak for the other panelists, and they don't speak for me.

no, of course not. it is no more useful to think of this month's empyre guests as univocal as it is to consider the BlogoArtoSphere as a monolithic entity. i certainly didn't state or imply either of those assumptions.

on empyre, i think you will find those onList are also operating from widely divergent positions that share sum commonalities. while there are always socially constructed norms, protocols + patterns to any interaction (+ esp an emergent, dynamic + unstable list culture where the soft skin is a meshwork + permeable on a moment to moment basis) empyre is (in + of itself [which is itself constructed differently @ any given timond]) also of course neither univocal or monolithic.

i value empyre deeply b/c of it's vital discussions, structure + focus. as a former guest who has been onList long prior to guesting, i have found this exchange sincerely challenging, meaningful + exciting. fostering, maintaining + growing an effort such as this is complex + difficult for all involved, esp those who guest + admin. so much respect to all: those onList who {lurk|listen} + post, guest + admin.


// jonCates
# http://www.criticalartware.net
# http://www.systemsapproach.net
# http://newmedianowandthen.blogspot.com
# http://www.filmvideoandnewmedia.info

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.