[-empyre-] OSW: open source writing in the network

xDxD.vs.xDxD xdxd.vs.xdxd at gmail.com
Fri Jan 13 06:39:38 EST 2012

Hello everyone,

 Dmytri was saying:

Is Free Culture content to be a beleaguered, insular, fringe? Or is Free
> Culture meant to be a critique of our curent cultural industries? Does it
> aim only for it's own meagre existence? Or does it aim for the
> transformation of cultural production? If the answer is the later, than
> this ambition can not be reconciled with capitalism.
Free Culture/Capitalism is a conversation.

Differences make transformation: you  change the "situation" and you change
yourself, as well; few minutes after the transformation the conversation
goes on, along slightly (or drastically, in some cases) different lines.

Yet the conversation remains: both (or multiple) parties changed, new
differences emerge, conversation goes on.

"revolution" never existed.

obviously, visions (is it maybe what you call "ambitions"?) are needed, to
choose directions.

But there are many more layers below this level of the discussion, having
to do with the lifestyle of people, with the ways in which they perceive
their world and their daily routines, what they are aware of, what they are
not aware of and what they don't care about, for whatever reason it is.

Speaking about "publishing", and "openness", i see it as one of the most
powerful opportunities to promote visions, in performative ways.

Publications can take many different forms, arriving at ubiquity, creating
the possibility for different forms of awareness, and for the creation of
the opportunities to become more informed, active, interconnected presences
on the planet and in societies.

This possibly fosters a more active "conversation" and, thus, a stronger
process for transformation.

Thence, my previous question about the definition of "successful" projects.

How do you measure it?

Is it possible?
Is it interesting?

How do you define the "success" of an open publishing project/process, for
By number of participants?
By the structure of its process? (how do you measure/qualify it?)
By number of readers?  (?!?!?)
By the times it is has been invited to festivals and conferences? (who? the
project? one of its authors? participants? theorists? "users"? )
By the number of people who "can make a living out of it"? (what does it
mean? how?)
By the number of people who "changed their minds about something"? (how do
you measure it?)

By what?

these are smaller questions.

yet they describe the scenario in possibly more usable forms, letting
people understand what/how/where/when/why can be changed, and to what

possibly the most revolutionary action that you perform today is to create
"something that works", answer these (or other like these) questions, share
knowledge and answers with other people and move onto something else.

and this is an "open publishing" process.

all the best!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20120112/8998390a/attachment.htm>

More information about the empyre mailing list