Re: [-empyre-] Netbehaviour

[marc <marc.garrett@furtherfield.org>]

Hi Helen,

> >marc, you don't need to take sole responsibility for kicking that 
individual off the netbehaviour list. i was one of many who complained 
about him, both on and off list, & i wasn't the only one who was 
relieved when he was gone. even filtering his posts straight into the 
trash was annoying bcos at the time i was on a very dodgy dialup, & then 
there were everyone else's reactionary responses ...

Yes - i did get an awful lot of personal mail from angry 
'netbehavourists' who were asking for this individual to be removed. 
When one is involved in many other different time consuming projects as 
I am - and something like this situation arrives, and it is 
pschologically draining, when dealing with the negative effect of just 
'one' individual, in contrast to the many on a list. Sometimes you just 
get the urge to slice them out of the picture and hope that the problem 
just disappears...of course, it did not. It transmuted into the influx of

But in the end negotiation was the best way for all concerned - I know 
that there are always certain individuals who would rather just have 
their voice heard all of the time no matter what the consequences of any 
list and its overal users, rather than share progressions Yet, all lists 
should can find ways of dealing with it - without people just signing 
off or out...if people sign out, it is apersonal decision, just as much 
as an individual staying on alist to try and ruin it for others (whether 
it be unconsciously or consciously).

In response to 'dodgy dialups' and 56k modem connections - I was glad 
that we on Netbehaviour decided to opt for residencies on the list that 
offer small postings (images 35k or less), it seems to be working well 
so far.

>
> i'm all for open & unmoderated lists but i also get pissed off when 
individuals abuse that openness, especially when it becomes very 
petty/nasty/excessive. the difficulty is where to draw the line (if at 
all) & which response to choose. i could have unsubscribed from 
netbehaviour (something i still occasionally consider) but so far i'm 
glad i haven't. if many people responded by unsubscribing, what kind of 
a list are you left with & what is its purpose?

I do think that it is up to the individuals concerned to respect the 
rest of the list and even ask the list members/moderators what they 
collectively wish to tolerate. I personally, can tolerate an awful lot 
of noise and ego-bashing, but I am not making all the decisions anymore 
in regards to the lists moderation, which really helps - because it 
potentially takes the personal resentment out of asking individuals to 
calm down (for whatever reasons) when it is decided via a collaborative 
consensus. And yes, it might not work some individuals but at least they 
know the deal and why they syddenly striked out.

>
> so far, netbehaviour is a pretty interesting experiment in human 
behaviour, & there's good info & projects coming thru amongst all the 
fluff. it will be interesting to see what happens if/when the 
controversial voting system is exercisede ...

It certainly is an interesting exploration in human behaviour...

Yes - the voting system was termed as fascistic by a certain individual 
but the rest of the netbehaviourists thoguht it was a good idea - it is 
yet to be administered but I get a feeling that it soon will happen.

For those who are interested in what the netbehaviourists decided 
collaboratively, look below - it will change and be tweeked in time of 
course, but we are all learning as we go along - the thing is to not be 
reliant on systems and stick with them, they have to change according to 
the behaviour of the list members not the needs of the moderators...

NetBehaviour Time Out
================+>
Anyone can call for a Time Out.
If more than five people say Yes, then that person gets a one week Time Out.
When they are back, if it this happens again they get a two week Time Out.
And Again - they are history.
================+>
(remember this was agreed by the list users/members - its not computer 
science it is net behaviour)

thanx again

marc


>
> h : )
>
>>
>> I find this question above, that Andreas asked - regarding my own 
personal experience at the moment is very poignant - Furtherfield.org - 
recently set up a list called www.netbehaviour.org a little while back.
>>
>> We wanted to break down the over-seriousness that many lists have 
been reverting to. Sure intellectual debate is fine, but such a singular 
way of being is so dry and can just kill those fertile creative juices. 
Ok - yes, academic lists are cool - but what about the artists, they 
don't wanna be typing lengthy dissertations every time they post a 
message to a list - many do, but some also wish to be part of something 
that communicates in way that lets one relax a little and not feel 
self-conscious about what one is saying all of the time.
>>
>> I certainly learned my lesson in respect of control and all - when I 
bumped someone off the netbehaviour list for posting hundreds of (what i 
thought) was non-sensical and dreary self referential emails about one;s 
persons personal life continuously. I felt that it was distracting and 
killing the soul of the list - so I kicked that individual out. The list 
members complained (a lot) and they had good reason to...
>>
>> The consensus was that - 'for a small network of socially and 
culturally engaged people to, be able to discover a real sense of 
list-authenticity - things just have to be a little more relaxed and 
less worried. Less fear about whether the list is doing things right all 
of the time. So I was asked literally to stop fathering the list as 
though I owned it, cuz I didn't - it was their list, and mine, our list.
>>
>> So control was offered over the list members to make decisions 
collaboratively in future, some people disagreed but it was 
democratically decided on....and more people wanted to take control of 
the list than just a small minority of people who wish to have their 
mission statements acted out by others.
>>
>> Control is not in mine or furtherfield's little slippery paws 
anymore) - the moderation has evolved into a collaborative occasion(s), 
where there is a voting system that decides what goes down at the 
little' list of evolutionary behaviour.
>>
>> On netbehaviour - the performers are taking over - yet in a way that 
is collaboratively decided. For instance we have set up list residencies 
so net creatives who have list noise, that they wish to declare, share & 
debate. They can ask the list members publicly, to have their work/ideas 
seen for 2 weeks as a list residency.
>>
>> So far we have had Brad Brace, who showed some excellent work. We 
have archived the whole list-behaviour between list members and brad 
brace, and much critical and playful discussion was had by many on the list.
>>
>> We now have Mez who is taking part in the list residency, and mez is 
piling and kinds of fantastical symbols, sigils and poetic noise that 
moves beyond academic reasonings alone, for it is performance - it is 
behaviour.
>>
>> I feel that many (official) lists have missed out on a lot of 
creativity, by not encouraging list exploration - or not trying to 
change their own intentions to adapt to the very urgent and contemporary 
needs of list users. Lists should be alive, sinful, critical, breathing, 
breathing, breathing...
>>
>> NetBehaviour List Residencies:
>> - an ongoing in-house project built by users of this list.
>>
>> An networked artist/curator/writer residency lasting for 2 weeks 
where a practitioner's work is seen, as part of the list experience, 
adding an authentic sense of stuff to the list that does not necessarily 
rely just on debate alone, but also on behaviour. A grass roots form of 
intellectual behaviour that is creative just by being what it 
is...net.behaviour.
>>
>> marc garrett
>> http://www.furtherfield.org
>>
>