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

[//jonCates <joncates@criticalartware.net>]

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
> >list.

+ 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.

&hearts;

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