The Rhizome Digest merged into the Rhizome News in November 2008. These pages serve as an archive for 6-years worth of discussions and happenings from when the Digest was simply a plain-text, weekly email.
|
Subject: RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.09.04 From: digest@rhizome.org (RHIZOME) Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 12:46:02 -0700 Reply-to: digest@rhizome.org Sender: owner-digest@rhizome.org RHIZOME DIGEST: July 9, 2004 Content: +announcement+ 1. Roopesh Sitharan: Open Call For Online Participation 2. Ian Clothier: the District Of Leistavia welcomes you at ISEA 2004 +opportunity+ 3. Deanna Bowen: Executive Director, InterAccess Electronic Media Arts Centre 4. Robert Zimmer: New Masters Programme in Arts Computing at Goldsmiths College, London 5. jillian mcdonald: digital artist in residence 6. tammy: Technical Director Position AT Squeaky Wheel/Buffalo Media Resources 7. Simon Biggs: FW: re PhD studentship announcement 8. Annette Weintraub: Visiting Artist Position +work+ 9. variablemedia: "Twinned With" at Variablemedia 10. Eduardo Navas: Diary of a Star: new project +thread+ 11. Jason Van Anden, Lee Wells, Dyske Suematsu, Francis Hwang , curt cloninger, jeremy, Bob Wyman, t.whid, Michael Szpakowski, ][mez][, Matthew Mascotte <mascotte AT mac.com>, Alexander Galloway, liza sabater, Joy Garnett: Blog vs Board (re: Blogging Survey) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 1. Date: 7/08/04 From: Roopesh Sitharan <intergra AT rocketmail.com> Subject: OPEN CALL FOR ONLINE PARTICIPATION OPEN CALL FOR ONLINE PARTICIPATION Info on participating online at UD on: Tuesday July 27, 2004 interFACES <LIVE>: A cross-cultural project exploring the impact of globalization, free market capitalism, consumerism, and communication technology on the young generation, especially in regards to the notion of self, identity, nationality, spirituality and cross cultural experiences. The task is simple- Upload your self portrait and download other's self portrait to be digitally manipulated, turning each face into a typical and stereotyped face of your countrymen. We are very much interested in your virtual participation, collaboration and feedback, and hope that you can join us from wherever you are at that day! You are also welcomed to join us physically if you are anywhere around the participating venues: National Art Gallery Malaysia Multimedia University Malaysia University Sains Malaysia Raffles LaSalle International Design School Thailand | Tuesday, July 27 | | 14.00 - 16.00hrs MAS, GMT + 0800 | | Kuala Lumpur | WEBARCHIVE of the project and LIVE collaboration via: http://www.uploaddownload.org If you think you may be able to join us online, please register online beforehand through the website. Best regards, looking forward to having you with us on that day, Roopesh Sitharan roopesh AT mmu.edu.my + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 2. Date: 7/08/04 From: Ian Clothier <i.clothier AT witt.ac.nz> Subject: the DISTRICT OF LEISTAVIA welcomes you at ISEA 2004 {??&theDISTRICT OF LEISTAVIAwelcomesyou||participate++.1234END} Do not adjust your keyboard. This is a call to artists and interested persons: you are invited to participate, collaborate and contribute. Gender equality, sustainable use of resources, birds, cats, boats, hybrid cultures and interconnections between cultures: are one or more of these of interest to you? If so, this projects invites your participation. the DISTRICT OF LEISTAVIA welcomes you at ISEA 2004 Internet space will be territorialised as part of a project for ISEA 2004. The project falls within the umbrella of the interRepublic of Hybridia, a nonlinear, non-geographical entity mediated by digital files - it's cultural boundary is ultimately flexible. The District of Leistavia within the interRepublic of Hybridia is a projected hybrid cultural space influenced by cultures worldwide. People of all backgrounds are invited to contribute. The project is one of a growing number of â??digital fluxusâ?? type events. Contributions can be in the form of the gift of images (copyright free only), taking part in the discussion and collaborating. Territorialisation Interested persons and artists are free to dream of a space unhindered by orthodoxy, where hierarchy is not presumed. The space will then be created. What is able to be done in the name of Leistavia depends on the discussion that occurs. If a zone was territorialised from law making up, what kind of zone would be generated, in 2004? That is one question this project sets out to answer. The discussion will take place via email, be documented on web pages and an image collection assembled and projected. Should this space then be de-territorialised? Image and text context Cultural interconnections will be sought and images combined and manipulated to suit. People of all cultures are invited to take part in the project, and a special request is made to people of the cultures of Estonia and Finland, and Pitcairn-Norfolk culture. These and other cultural energies will flow through the DISTRICT OF LEISTAVIA [see note 1 below]. The 1838 Laws of Pitcairn Island, a unique document, is used as a starting point for locating connections. The Laws gave women and men the vote and made education compulsory for both genders. Sustainable use of wood resource was vital. The gravest criminal act in 1838 was to kill a cat, for which there was a fine of $50. There were no laws against assault, stealing or murder as these were unknown. White birds were also protected in the Laws. Aspects of the Pitcairn Laws used as context for cultural interconnection in this project are gender equality, sustainability, and birds & cats. Boat stories or mythologies are also likely to be an interconnecting factor. Further interconnections may also be discovered in the process. What to do Email the co-ordinating artist Ian M Clothier at i.clothier AT witt.ac.nz and register your interest. Please read the comments about contributions by clicking on the {+GIVE%=YOU} link, and related material at the project interim web pages: http://www.art-themagazine.com/hybridia Mirror: http://ianclothier.orcon.net.nz/hybridia/index.htm Ian M Clothier Note 1. Known main cultural groups in Finland, Estonia, Norfolk Island and Pitcairn Island are: Finn, Swede, Sami, Roma, Tatar, Estonian, Russian, Ukranian, Belarusian, descendants of Bounty mutineers, English, Tahitian, Australian, New Zealander, Maori, Polynesian and others. Others are welcome to contribute/participate. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome is now offering organizational subscriptions, memberships purchased at the institutional level. These subscriptions allow participants of an institution to access Rhizome's services without having to purchase individual memberships. (Rhizome is also offering subsidized memberships to qualifying institutions in poor or excluded communities.) Please visit http://rhizome.org/info/org.php for more information or contact Rachel Greene at Rachel AT Rhizome.org. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 3. Date: 7/02/04 From: Deanna Bowen <deanna AT interaccess.org> Subject: CALL FOR APPLICANTS - EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, InterAccess Electronic Media Arts Centre InterAccess Electronic Media Arts Centre EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CALL FOR APPLICANTS InterAccess Electronic Media Arts Centre is a not-for-profit artist-run centre in Toronto, Canada that enables artists and the general public to explore the intersections of art and technology. We are currently seeking an individual to fulfill the position of Executive Director. POSITION MANDATE: The InterAccess Executive Director is the driving force behind the organization¹s mandate and vision, navigating the stability and growth of the organization in all areas related to its strategic development, programming and special projects. Working with Board of Directors, the Administrative Director and Program Manager, the position ensures the that the overall activities of the organization are in keeping with its mission. The Executive Director is a visionary with social entrepreneurial skills and a rich contact base, and will optimize the capacity of the organization by generating various types of support to its programs and services. The ideal candidate will have background in or knowledge of the media arts/electronic arts landscape in Canada and abroad, posses excellent organizational and communication skills, experience in curatorial research practices, public relations, grant writing, is energetic and goal-oriented. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POSITION: * Curatorial direction: With input from the staff and Programming Advisory Committee, sets the overall artistic and curatorial direction of the organization for each season, including the use of facilities, education and workshop programs; supervises the Program Manager and Administrative Director to ensure smooth implementation of such programs; monitors programs as they progress. Manages the Program Advisory Committee. * Strategic development: Identifying new funding opportunities and partnerships; maintaining and strengthening current relationships; identifying opportunities (domestic and international) for financial and profile enhancement. * Grant applications/proposal writing: Working with the staff and Board, leading the direction of grant applications for core funding (TAC, OAC, CC); developing project grant applications, as required; grant reporting. * Special project assessment and overall management: Assesses special project proposals for eligibility for consideration as they are received, manages assessment of proposals, creates and maintains relations with external producers as projects progress. Responsible for successful conclusion to each special project. * Marketing communications: Working with the Administrative Director and Communications Coordinator, creating and leading clear and concise communications of InterAccess¹ programs and member services. * Budgeting: Directs the overall strategy to annual budget, working with the Administrative Director, including development and maintenance of budget for core programs. * Liase with community: Creates and fosters good relationships with core membership and electronic media arts community in Canada and abroad. * Statutory functions: government reporting, attendance at Board and Programming Advisory Committee meetings. * Delegation: Delegates appropriate responsibilities to staff under the Executive Director¹s supervision. * Internal communications: Maintains open and clear channels of communication with the Board of Directors and committees of the Board; attending meetings when needed; writes monthly report to the Board. HOURS AND COMPENSATION: The position requires 32 hours per week (4 days per week) and is prorated against an annual salary of 40,000CAD. Initially, vacation allowance is 2 weeks, and becomes 3 weeks after two years, and 4 weeks after 5 years. Performance is reviewed annually. There is an initial probationary review period of six months. All applicants selected for an interview will be required to submit one writing sample of a grant application, curatorial writing or proposal, in advance of the interview. Interested individuals should forward their cover letter and resume by July 23, 2004, to: InterAccess Electronic Media Arts Centre Attn: Hiring Committee/ED Position 444 - 401 Richmond St. W. Toronto, ON M5V 3A8 Canada Fax: +1-416 599-7015 Email: jobs AT interaccess.org (if by email, please send .rtf files only) We thank all applicants for their interest, but only short-listed candidates will be contacted. ............ InterAccess Electronic Media Arts Centre #444, 401 Richmond Street West, Toronto, ON M5V 3A8 www.interaccess.org P.: 416.599.7206 F.: 416.599.7015 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4. Date: 7/02/04 From: Robert Zimmer <r.zimmer AT gold.ac.uk> Subject: New Masters Programme in Arts Computing at Goldsmiths College, London MSc in Arts Computing Arts Computing is a new one year Masters Programme that has been developed to enable to students with good arts backgrounds to learn advanced computing topics and techniques in the context of visual arts and design. It will give you a firm foundation in Computing, which will enable you to take on a leading role in a creative or technical firm, go on to do academic research at the boundary between computing and art, or simply to produce artworks that are informed by the latest thinking in Computer Science. For further information see http://www.doc.gold.ac.uk/artscomputing.html + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 5. Date: 7/05/04 From: jillian mcdonald <jillianmcdonald AT hotmail.com> Subject: digital artist in residence Digital Artist-in-residence The Pace Digital Gallery and The Center for Advanced Media (CAM) is pleased to offer an artist's residency beginning Spring 2005. This is a pilot program. We are offering a digital artist the opportunity to work with CAM's resources to produce a new artwork. Site The Center for Advanced Media (CAM) Is a collaborative research environment located in Pace University's School of Computer Science and Information Systems in downtown New York City. Its goal is to develop computer-oriented, human-centered systems that help people solve problems by transforming the way they experience the world and the way they collaborate within it. CAM is founded on Pace University's collective faculty experiences in software engineering, human-computer interaction, information visualization, and computer graphics. These computing fields are fundamentally human-centric, with design as the common approach to complex representational problems. Because visual artists, musicians, and writers possess different perceptual, design, and representational skills, CAM is interested in augmenting its computer science foundations with participants who work in the arts and humanities to broaden the research and educational mix. The Pace Universityâ??s Digital Gallery is an outgrowth of CAM's conceptual foundation, executed as the combined initiative between CAM and Fine Arts Department. Its goal is to foster the creation and understanding of digital art for the benefit of Pace University and the surrounding community. It furthers Pace Universityâ??s commitment to educational excellence, diversity, and civic involvement by exhibiting curated work of leading digital artists, as well as the work of Pace faculty and students. It sponsors lectures and symposia on digital art, and supports publication of materials for its documentation and promotion. The Digital Galleryâ??s first show entitled Digital Downtown opened to rave reviews in Spring 2003. Since then it has co-hosted a Pan-American collaborative performance event titled Accélerateur, and an installation of video works entitled Screen Kiss. Its current online exhibition eBay: Buy or Sell or Buy, will run through September 2004. An evening of artists' talks was organized and catalogue issued in conjunction with the eBay exhibition. Residency The artist-in-residence will have the opportunity to work with CAM faculty and students whose research includes computer graphics, virtual reality, image processing, human-computer interaction, and collaborative computing. This work is supported by technology that includes a virtual reality display system, networked PCs, multi-display and plasma display systems, projectors, video cameras, scanners, etc. The artist-in-residence will be expected to produce a new artwork during their tenure at Pace (January 30 - May 10, 2005), which will remain the property of the artist. Pace Digital Gallery will produce, with the artist, a printed brochure about the work completed in residence, and will expect the artist to give a presentation of their work to the Pace Community and the general public. Pace Digital Gallery will also feature the artist on our website, and in gallery space at Pace University. There will be a modest stipend, but no living accommodations are provided. Access to equipment will be Monday through Friday from 8:00AM to 6:00PM, and Saturday from 8:00AM to 3:00PM. Pace University affirms its commitment to the principle of equal Career Opportunities as stated in Federal, State, and local laws, which prohibits discrimination because of sex, race, age, ethnicity, marital or domestic partnership status, national origin, sexual orientation, religion, disability or veteran. Artists will be chosen by a jury comprised of the gallery directors, as well as a local artist and curator. Pace University Digital Gallery Francis T. Marchese and Jillian Mcdonald, co-directors DigitalGallery AT pace.edu http://www.pace.edu/digitalgallery Applications due Oct 1, 2004 Please send via mail (email applications will not be accepted): 1. cover letter and project description, describing how the work proposed relates to the artist's body of work 2. CV, bio 3. work samples - DVD, CD-Rom, URLs, etc 4. SASE if you wish your work to be returned Prof. Jillian Mcdonald Pace Digital Gallery 41 Park Row #1205 New York, NY 10038 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome is now offering organizational subscriptions, memberships purchased at the institutional level. These subscriptions allow participants of an institution to access Rhizome's services without having to purchase individual memberships. (Rhizome is also offering subsidized memberships to qualifying institutions in poor or excluded communities.) Please visit http://rhizome.org/info/org.php for more information or contact Rachel Greene at Rachel AT Rhizome.org. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 6. Date: 7/08/04 From: tammy <tammymcgovern AT yahoo.com> Subject: TECHNICAL DIRECTOR POSITION AT SQUEAKY WHEEL/BUFFALO MEDIA RESOURCES Squeaky Wheel/Buffalo Media Resources, is looking for a self-motivated, responsible and detail-oriented individual to fill the part-time position of Technical Director. Must be familiar with video, 16mm and 8mm film production and projection equipment. Should have knowledge of Mac-based operating systems. Familiarity with Mac-based editing and DVD authoring a very strong plus. Should be sympathetic to and familiar with independent and community-based media. Please send letter of intent, resume and names of three references by July 29th to: Squeaky Wheel Att. Technical Director Search 175 Elmwood Ave Buffalo, NY 14201 No phone calls please. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + For $65 annually, Rhizome members can put their sites on a Linux server, with a whopping 350MB disk storage space, 1GB data transfer per month, catch-all email forwarding, daily web traffic stats, 1 FTP account, and the capability to host your own domain name (or use http://rhizome.net/your_account_name). Details at: http://rhizome.org/services/1.php + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 7. Date: 7/08/04 From: Simon Biggs <simon AT littlepig.org.uk> Subject: FW: re PhD studentship announcement The Art and Design Research Centre (ADRC) at Sheffield Hallam University is offering a university-funded PhD studentship in Fine Art, Design or Media Production. The studentship will provide fees, a maintenance allowance in line with UK Research Council norms and some support with practical research costs. We invite enquiries from people who have achieved a high standard in their previous studies, who have identified a challenging research problem in an area of which they have a broad understanding. This may have arisen from earlier postgraduate studies or from professional experience. Sheffield Hallam University is one of the UK's leading research centres for Art, Design and Media Production, achieving a 5 rating in the most recent UK Research Assessment Exercise. We were also the first UK University to introduce a full-time Research Methods training programme in Art and Design leading to a Masters Qualification. Our research includes a significant amount of collaborative work with other disciplines, notably in healthcare materials science and in computer science. To develop this inter-disciplinary theme the university has formed a Culture, Communication & Computing Research Institute in which ADRC is the largest element. We encourage research in which creative practice plays a significant part in investigations and we have taken a lead in developing and disseminating effective methods for investigative creative practice. If you would like to explore this opportunity, please send me a CV and brief outline of your research interests. regards Chris Rust ********************************** Professor Chris Rust Head of Art and Design Research Centre Sheffield Hallam University, UK c.rust AT shu.ac.uk Simon Biggs simon AT littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ Research Professor Art and Design Research Centre Sheffield Hallam University, UK http://www.shu.ac.uk/schools/cs/cri/adrc/research2/ Senior Research Fellow Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 8. Date: 7/08/04 From: Annette Weintraub <annette AT annetteweintraub.com> Subject: Visiting Artist Position Visiting Assistant Professor. Starting Sept. 1, 2004. Interactive Multimedia/Digital Video/Computer-based Design Department of Art, The City College of New York. Qualifications: M.F.A. or equivalent, plus college teaching. Seeking a professionally-engaged artist or artits/designer with broad interests/skills in interactive multimedia, digital video and screen based design. Other interests might include physical computing, and/or gaming. To teach undergraduate courses in interactive multimedia, digital video and BFA thesis, plus possible development of courses in gaming/physical computing. Strong exhibition/professional record of achievement. Must demonstrate excellent administrative, communication and technical skills. Shared responsibility for program administration as well as department committee work and significant student advisement. Send a Letter of Interest with CV by email, asap to: Professor Annette Weintraub at weintraub AT ccny.cuny.edu. Finalists will be asked to send an artists' statement, statement of teaching philosophy; CV; portfolio of own and student work on CD or as URL, along with the names, addresses & phone numbers of 3 references by July 26, 2004. For furtheer information contact: Professor Ellen Handy, Chair, Art Department. City College of New York. Convent Avenue at 138th Street, NY, NY 10031. 212 650-7421. An AAEO/ADA/IRCA Employer. http://www.ccny.cuny.edu/electronic_design + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 9. Date: 7/05/04 From: variablemedia <info AT variablemedia.info> Subject: "Twinned With" at Variablemedia "Twinned With" by the artist Cliona Harmey. Started 22nd June 2004 at http://www.variablemedia.org Further information at http://www.variablemedia.info --- Variablemedia's latest project is "Twinned With" by the artist Cliona Harmey. Online at variablemedia.org, this work is developing over a 40-day period. The project starts with a series of photographic images taken by the artist along a walking route through an Irish coastal town; the small town she grew up in. They are presented in sequence, each one a clickable link to the next in the journey. The images have been created using a matchbox camera obsura attached to the lens of a digital video camera. This process of analogue filtering digital, obfuscates image detail, creating temporal vistas, which could be attributed to a multitude of places. During the 40-day project, Harmey will regularly replace a number of images in the sequence with similar photographs, images which copy the original compositions, taken whilst making journeyâ??s through other locations. Harmey sees her photographs as both material embodiment and metaphor for memory. Retracing a journey she took time and again as a child she captures the subject using a technique which suggests a falsification of history. By applying processes of repetition, replication and remixing to the original photographic narrative, she alludes to an experience of memory, one in which details, times and places can be rewritten according to the present. These evolving image sequences are not personal souvenirs but acknowledgements of the fragile nature of recorded experience. Cliona Harmey is an Irish artist who works with a variety of media including video installation, photography and the Internet. She has shown her work in numerous exhibitions internationally; â??Thaw 01â??, The Institute of Communication and Culture, Iowa; â??Tisâ??, State of the Art Gallery, Ithaca, New York; â??Vdor Break 21â??, Llubijana, Slovenia; â??The Reading Roomâ??, Catalyst Arts, Belfast. Harmey lives in Dublin and works as a lecturer in Fine Art Media at the National College of Art and Design. This is her second project for Variablemedia. Related Links Cliona Harmey's personal website: http://www.charmey.net Definition and history of Camera Obscura: http://www.acmi.net.au/AIC/CAMERA_OBSCURA.html Previous project for Variablemedia 'SeaPoint' hosted at Rhizome's Artbase: http://rhizome.org/artbase/7110/index.htm + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 10. Date: 7/08/04 From: Eduardo Navas <eduardo AT navasse.net> Subject: DIARY OF A STAR: new project Recent Project: http://navasse.net/star/index.html DIARY OF A STAR is a critical take on blogging that appropriates selections from the Andy Warhol Diaries. Read the context link for more details: http://navasse.net/star/Context.html Best, Eduardo Navas http://navasse.net http://netartreview.net + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 11. Date: 7.04.04 - 7.12.04 From: Jason Van Anden <jason AT smileproject.com>, Lee Wells <lee AT leewells.org>, Dyske Suematsu <dyske AT dyske.com>, Francis Hwang <francis AT rhizome.org>, curt cloninger <curt AT lab404.com>, jeremy <jeremy AT silencematters.com>, Bob Wyman <bobwyman AT pubsub.com>, t.whid <twhid AT twhid.com>, Michael Szpakowski <szpako AT yahoo.com>, ][mez][ <netwurker AT hotkey.net.au>, Matthew Mascotte <mascotte AT mac.com>, Alexander Galloway <galloway AT nyu.edu>, liza sabater <liza AT culturekitchen.com>, Joy Garnett <joyeria AT walrus.com> Subject: Blog vs Board (re: Blogging Survey) Jason Van Anden <jason AT smileproject.com> posted: I am a fairly new member to the Rhizome community. When I first discovered Rhizome, I was excited to find a forum of artists with common interests and concerns, and looked forward to the discussions that would take place, and that I could take place in. Since I joined a few months ago, there have only been a few sustained threads, while the archives are filled with lively and fascinating discussion. What happened? The recent survey requesting community interest in a blog service via Rhizome has caused me to wonder if this is because of some trend; moving away from boards, and towards blogs. If so, I wonder what the ramifications of this may be. In some ways, blogs and boards are the similar, they both enable ongoing, two way communication. The clear difference is that a blog is run by it's moderator, which changes the dynamic, a lot. If everyone runs their own blog, everyone is a moderator, and system becomes decentralized. This requires more effort by the blog owner and his/her audience. The person running the blog needs to keep things interesting enough to keep people visiting, the audience needs to keep track of many blogs instead of one. At the time that I discovered Rhizome, I also discovered a lot of other on-line resources influenced by it. After doing an unscientific cost/benefits analysis, I decided that the service that Rhizome provides as a centralized and democratic community was the best one, and decided to become a member. Personally, this meant that I devote some of my time (and ego) for the greater good of the group, by posting my opinions and reactions to topics of interest, in one place. I believe that a socialist-democracy (the ideal of Rhizome) is a much better way for this community to thrive than anarchy (fractured, poorly maintained blogs). In order for this to happen, I think that members need to deliberately devote their resources to the good of the board than their own blogs. Given that we all have a finite amount of time to devote to our art, our day-jobs, and so on, I am interested in why members feel it is better to blog than to participate in a board. Best Regards, Jason Van Anden + + + Lee Wells <lee AT leewells.org> added: Survey Says, "EGO. was the number one reason for self-aggrandized blogging." + + + Dyske Suematsu <dyske AT dyske.com> replied: Every medium and context encourage their own unique behaviors. For instance, a friend of mine is a member of WeightWatchers.com, and she showed me what sort of discussions take place on their boards. I was quite surprised to see women behaving badly. On most discussion boards, women tend to behave more civilzed than men do. But, apparently, in a context where they know there are only women, they change their behaviors. (Or perhaps it is the topic of weight that encourages that sort of behavior; who knows.). Minor differences in user interface, system architecture, graphic design, theme, the personality of the organizers, etc. can influence the behaviors of the members significantly. I currently manage several discussion boards and I am always surprised by how differently people behave because of these subtle differences. By changing small aspects of them, you can encourage or discourage certain behaviors. For instance, making people register first before posting makes a big difference in terms of the quality of content; you get a lot less abusive posts. Being able to easily view all the posts made by a specific user, makes people think twice about saying anything too stupid. And so on... Blogs and discussion boards are quite different. For one, blogs, for the most part, are one-way communication. You have something you want to say, and you say it on your blog, not necessarily expecting that people would respond. Not all thoughts you want to write down are appropriate for discussion boards, even less so for discussion boards with specific subject matters, like Rhizome. So, I do not see blogs and boards as something you need to choose. As for the lack of interesting discussions on this list: There are things you can do to encourage interesting discussions too. I've always found Rhizome to be problematic when it comes to how it supports text. Thoughtful posts, like that of Curt you pointed out, get lost in a flood of other posts. It may get on the home page for a few weeks, but after that, it gets the same treatment as the other posts that contain frivolous remarks. Unless you know exactly what you are looking for, there is no easy way to browse though quality content on the site. If there were a page with a list of substantial contributions, many more readers would be encouraged to read them, and that in turn would encourage writers to submit more substantial contents. When most people go to sites like nytimes.com, they do not exactly know what they want to read. They just know the quality and the reputation associated with New York Times. nytimes.com therefore needs to provide a way to let the readers easily scan through contents. If their home page looked like Google's home page, most people would simply go elsewhere. This is essentially the situation Rhizome has with respect to substantial contents contributed to RAW. It does not make sense especially because the majority of Rhizome's content is relatively timeless. (This particular post that I am writing now, for instance, should still be relevant to some readers a year from now.) So, given this design of the site, you as a writer know, consciously or subconsciously, that whatever you write will be for the consumption of the few who happen to catch it at the right time. This does not make you want to spend much time composing your thoughts. It makes more sense to use the list for something more casual (like short comments and remarks) or temporary (like announcements of current events). For these reasons, I believe that being frustrated with the way people are behaving or not behaving is a waste of time. Trying to discipline people by criticizing achieves very little. You need to provide an environment that makes them want to behave certain ways. Now, as an experiement, if you have read this post this far, I would like you to click on the link below which will count the number of people who actually read this. I'm curious how many people in general actually read posts on Rhizome. Many people open a web page or email, but not many, I suspect, actually read the content. http://www.dyske.com/visit.asp?p=1 -Dyske + + + Jason Van Anden replied: RSS feeds might solve the problem, (1: below) if everyone has their own blog. As Dyske points out (2:below), this is not trivial. To be worthy of community interest, it needs to be well maintained and promoted. If the community accepts that Rhizome Raw is like a community blog, the end result would be one rich site instead of many competing, poorly maintained and promoted sites. Dyske also point out (3: below) "As for the lack of interesting discussions on this list: There are things you can do to encourage interesting discussions too." I have tried to do this, and I suspect that it takes some practice. I have not enagaged in an online forum such as Rhizome before. Perhaps this is why I have such high expectations for it's potential. Jason Van Anden 1 - Geert Deekers >Tracking decentralized posts outside of rhizome, but within the rhizome >community could be facilitated -- just thinking aloud here folks -- by >implementing rss feeds. Joining the rhizome community with your blog >would then be as easy as posting your rss address to some specialized >rhizome page. Or does this already exist? 2 - Dyske Suematsu > Minor differences in user interface, system architecture, graphic > design, theme, the personality of the organizers, etc. can influence > the behaviors of the members significantly. I currently manage several > discussion boards and I am always surprised by how differently people > behave because of these subtle differences. 3 - Dyske Suematsu >As for the lack of interesting discussions on this list: There are things you can do to >encourage interesting discussions too. + + + Jason Van Anden added: The comments have been enlightening. To summarize, blogs serve different purposes not achieved by paritipating in a community message board: Ego (1 - Lee Wells) and protecting fellow message board participants from topics not necessarily appropriate for discussion (2 - Dyske Suematsu). Each raises an interesting question: 1.) Eyeballs == Ego Fuel: Does the typical individual's blog draw more traffic than Rhizome? 2.) Raw == 'Enter at Your Own Risk': Do the levels of Rhizome's board distillation (Raw as opposed to Digest, etc...) poorly protect the membership from inappropriate topics of discussion? Jason Van Anden + + + Dyske Suematsu replied: Let me avoid a confusion, and use the word "list" or "email list" instead of "board", because the latter is a medium of its own (generally web-based). I don't see the "ego" argument in this context. Ego is certainly the motive for both an email list and a blog (and a board). I do not believe that a blog is fueled more by ego than a list is. In many ways, a list is more ego-fueled since it is a "push" medium. You are pushing your message to people who may not be interested in what you have to say. I find a blog to be less egotistical because only those who are actually interested in what you have to say would come visit. It is less intrusive and less presumptuous. On my last post, I provided a link for those who actually read my post. So far 13 people have read it. When you hear that Rhizome has 17,000 members, you might get an idea that at least hundreds of people would read your posts, but no matter how big the list is, those who are willing to be involved actively are always handful. In fact, there is a natural size of active participants towards which all lists tend to incline. If too many people start discussing, it becomes impossible to keep on top of it. Part of the nature of email list is that there is a point at which the number of posts per day becomes unacceptable for most people. Like population growth of a city; at some point it becomes uncomfortable and people start leaving. All these characteristics of email list encourage and discourage certain behaviors. Because of the way Rhizome is set up, I would imagine that my last post will not be read by too many more people even after a year. So, when you write something for this list, you want to keep in mind that what you are writing is going to be read by about a dozen people. This will certainly influence most people in terms of how much time and energy they would spend on writing something. This is not a bad thing. This encourages people to casually express their opinions. In fact, that is my impression of Rhizome; a casual place, not a serious one. For the same reason, it is a good place for announcements. 76% of the members being artists, if you post an announcement for a grant or a commission, I'm sure hundreds of people would actually read it. The bottom line is that Rhizome cannot be everything you want it to be. It is what it is. It is good for what it is good for. Beyond that, you either have to find some other websites/lists/boards, or start your own with specific designs that encourage desired behaviors. Best, Dyske + + + Francis Hwang <francis AT rhizome.org> added: I'm up to my eyeballs in this stuff these days. Here's my take on it: First of all, it's only 2004 and I'm already sick of the word "blog". Unfortunately, there aren't many words that serve its purpose well, so we're stuck with it for the time being. In the long view, the particular technology that gets used isn't as interesting as the technical philosophy behind how people communicate. The best phrase here is, to use the title of a book by David Weinberger, "Small Pieces Loosely Joined". The good things about blogs are: + Small Pieces: They are highly atomized, individualistic venues for self-expression, more so than on more centrally administered services like email lists or wikis. + Loosely Joined: They use standards-driven technologies to help readers aggregate them into meaningful, manageable chunks of information. If you have an RSS reader (you can download good, free RSS readers for every operating system under the sun), you can channel-surf 20 blogs in the time it might take you to visually read 4 webpages. In a broad sense, the internet is now a big enough technology that the economics of such a case are compelling. You can no longer build one central community site that harnesses more energy than all those blogs out there. In the specific sense, this lines up well with the development of the field of new media arts. Once upon a time Rhizome was a gigantic fish in a teensy tiny pond; now we're a biggish fish in a much bigger pond. This is a much healthier situation, of course. It also means we might want to rethink how we relate to that pond. But, blogs are very different in tone from email lists, wikis, UltimateBBS, MOOs, etc., etc. They're much more public, and they drastically increase the "15 minutes of fame" factor of online life. It happens all the time that some no-name blogger comes up with some really great idea that gets passed around blogspace really quickly, and bang they have hundreds more readers and lots of emails and maybe comments. Having a blog increases the chances that some stranger will point to your work and say "This gal's a goddamn genius." It also increases the chances that they'll say "She's full of shit." Caveat author. So adding blogs to Rhizome would mostly be about offering options. Blogs won't replace email lists, just like television never replaced radio. But a proliferation of forms for online communication will mean that people will be free to discover which forms are better for which sorts of content. As to how quickly it would take if introduced here, it's hard to say. If you look at our space (tech/arts/culture), you see a lot of very smart people who don't write or read blogs, they prefer to hang out on mailing lists like Rhizome Raw or Nettime or thingist or Syndicate or what have you. I don't believe that's an accident, or simply a function of technophobia. People have their own preferences, and of course those preferences matter a great deal. Mostly, though, I think of this as a big experiment. Experiments are cool. F. + + + curt cloninger <curt AT lab404.com> replied: Hi Jason, To quote Gene Eugene, "it is what it is what it is." I often use RAW as my blog because I'm just stupid enough not to care. The only thing keeping anybody from posting anything at all (other than the token $5) is fear of being ridiculed, or losing face, or losing a commission, or losing status in whatever micro-scene politics one happens to be tracking. I was searching through old email correspondences the other day, and I found this classic squelch from my dear friend Tim Whidden, november, 2001: +++++++++++++++++++++++ please curt, why don't you grind your little axe over something else, it's getting very old and very tired. you've proved you're naive understanding of contemporary art practice again and again on this list, this thread is only the most recent example. +++++++++++++++++++++++ to which I replied: I love you (mostly since I discovered you used to copy heavy metal album covers). ++++++++++++++++++ Ah, those were the days! But I digress. Unlike Thing/NetTime, RAW is totally self-policing (due to Mark Tribe's original fascination with Beuys' "social sculpture" notion), so sometimes it's boring as crap, sometimes it's lively, sometimes it's hijacked by poly-pseudonymous eastern european situationist rhetorical tar babies. Often it talks about itself and how it can become more interesting. People get fed up with it and stop posting, but they usually return (brad brace, eryk salvaggio), because you gotta be in it to win it. All that to say, you can't make a totally open forum any more open via protocol or legislation. If you want to use RAW as a blog, you don't need RSS tech implemented on the rhizome server. Just cut and paste each entry from your blog and email it to list AT rihzome.org . ("Currently Listening To: Adam and the Ants. Current Mood: Feisty!") The achilles heel of rhizome is fear of critical discussion. [ cf: http://www.marumushi.com/apps/socialcircles/socialcircles.cfm?list=rhizome to visualize the lack of list interaction.] Between the academics and the relativists and the self-promoting artists, nobody dare say "sucks" without fear of receiving the scarlet letter ("S" for "sucks"). So we read each other's one-to-many announcements, and we occasionally make our own one-to-many announcements. And every now and then something like joywar or the CAE case gets everybody all stirred up (and understandably so). And then of course, the liberal majority always feels at liberty to perpetually slag all things un-liberal despite the fact that most of their screeds have nothing to do with new media art. I am always surprised at the number of people who email me offlist about discussions we are having onlist. Why don't they just post their comments to the list? But I hesitate to encourage lurkers to vocalize, the same way I hesitate to encouarage people to vote. If you're too apathetic to vote, why do I want you to vote? If you're too timid to post, why do I want you to post? peace, curt + + + Jason Van Anden replied: I agree with Francis that 'experiments are cool'. But experiments should be recognized as just that; a trial (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=experiment). Questioning whether blogging strengthens or weakens an online community is my attempt to follow Dyske's suggestion '... start your own with specific designs that encourage desired behaviors.' without having to build it myself. Jason Van Anden + + + Dyske Suematsu replied: Speaking of preferences. If I were in charge of the technology at Rhizome, my strategy would be this: I would try to define the objectives of Rhizome first, and then try to use technologies that best serve those objectives. What I end up choosing as my solutions may be nothing exciting, old technologies or something everyone uses. To define my objectives, I might ask questions like: Do I want to encourage thoughtful discussions that can be shared with a large audience? Do I want Rhizome to be a casual place where people can express their opinions freely whether they are intellectually or emotionally motivated? Would Rhizome members benefit more by encouraging intimate inter-member communication or one-to-many communication? Should Rhizome place its emphasis on supporting its own members or the general public who are interested in digital art? If one of the objectives is to raise awareness of digital art among the general public, what sort of content should Rhizome foster? How could we foster it? What would the general public want to see on Rhizome? How should the site be organized for that purpose? Should Rhizome be completely undiscriminating about what constitute good art, and collect everything and anything? (convenient for artists) Or should Rhizome use its own judgment and highlight works it deems as good art? (convenient for the audience) And so on... After answering these questions, I would find the best technologies for them, and implement them specifically for those objectives. I find that some technologists are too experimental without having specific visions and tangible goals. They experiment, and they describe the results of those experiments: How certain technologies ended up being used. What sort of social implications they have. What it is good for. How it changed people's lives. Etc.. That is, always after the fact. Their thinking is not: "We want to achieve this; so let's use this technology this way." Instead, they think: "Let's try this new technology and see what happens." Thus technologies get used for their own sake. Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying that this is what Francis does. I'm aware that he is concerned about some of the questions I raised above. I'm illustrating the two extremes in how technologists think. Everyone falls somewhere in between. In fact, someone does need to experiment with new technologies, for the rest of us to be able to use them appropriately. The question as a director of IT is: Is my role to explore the possibilities of new technologies, or to use them to serve a certain purpose? I find that many directors of IT end up doing the former because it is more exciting, better for their careers, and offers more recognition for their achievements. It is rare to see IT directors who put objectives before the allure of new technologies. I've personally witnessed millions of dollars go down the toilet because of these tendencies of IT directors. Again, I do not want to sound like I am criticizing Francis personally. This is simply my own personal philosophy of managing IT. -Dyske + + + Francis Hwang replied: Interesting points, Dyske. One of the broad questions in my mind was hinted at in my earlier post: In the face of an increasingly growing internet, and a much bigger new media arts world, how do you a) engage the parts of it that are interesting to you and b) foster some sort of sense of relationships and even (cough) community? So that's a goal of mine, though it's perhaps less concrete than the goals you offered. Blogs to me make sense because an increasing amount of discussion in our field lives outside the Rhizome walls. There are a lot of small reasons for it (and, yes, the membership policy is one of those) but the big reason is this: The internet ain't what it used to be. There are lots of people who want to maintain their own little atomic sites somewhere else besides on some mega-community site like Rhizome ... I think it would be cool to find ways to include them in the conversation, too. It's possible that doing so will bring more non-artsy people into the new media field. (Certain new-media-ish projects, like Dodgeball.com or Pac Manhattan, already get significant traction in the non-artsy memespace.) That would be sweet. It's also possible that a Rhizome bl*g product would make more artist/curator/critics into bl*ggers, upping the arts volume online overall. That would also be sweet. But I'm not even thinking that specifically. Mostly, I'm thinking about harnessing energy--by which I mean the desires and enthusiasm of other people. People want to talk to other people, and online communications works best when it complements that innate desire. Who do you want to talk to? What rhythm should the conversation have? What do you want to talk about? How can a site like Rhizome help you find those people and conversations? Maybe blogging will help. If it doesn't, I suppose people will just stop using it, and then we'll have to try something else. Francis + + + jeremy <jeremy AT silencematters.com> added: Dyske, I like your questions. I was thinking along similar lines today. I wanted to ask the community: "What is Rhizome? Can you describe it?" and as Dyske says, "What sort of content should Rhizome foster?" I think that with the open discussion of what it is, we will come to understand the direction it should take, through a natural process. Help me dream up ideas and possibilities! I am looking forward to an engaging discussion. -jeremy + + + Bob Wyman <bobwyman AT pubsub.com> added: Francis Hwang wrote: > If you have an RSS reader (you can download good, free RSS > readers for every operating system under the sun), you can > channel-surf 20 blogs in the time it might take you to > visually read 4 webpages. Warning: Crass plug follows: Francis, if you have an RSS news aggregator AND you have a few subscriptions (free) at PubSub.com, you can channel-surf over 2 million blogs and over 50,000 newsgroups simultaneously!!! What you do is create a subscription that specifies a search-query that we'll then match against every new blog entry as we discover it.(several million each day) Once something matches, we'll insert it into a personalized RSS file for you. This is like what you do with traditional "retrospective" search engines like Google, etc. except that we're "prospective" in that we search the future, not the past. bob wyman + + + t.whid <twhid AT twhid.com> added: Dyske's comments are right on the money IMO. [...] artists here, right? Isn't ego the basis of all their actions ;-) My thoughts regarding 'art blogging' are here: http://www.mteww.com/mtaaRR/news/twhid/art_blogs.html I'll pull one quote: Since it¹s very easy to update the site I just post things there all the time that I might email to either my collaborator M.River or post to a discussion list like Rhizome. I was very active on the Rhizome list for many years but I like the blog better. Discussions started on the blog are less likely to devolve into flame wars and it¹s less aggressive. If people want to read my opinions and thoughts the site is passively waiting for them to visit, my ideas don¹t wind up in people¹s in-boxes. Plus, after Rhizome switched to a fee-based membership I decided that any extended writings of mine needed to be freely accessible via the Internet. + + + Jason Van Anden replied: I think all of Dyske's questions are spot-on and super thoughtful (as usual). I feel the most important one is: >Do I want Rhizome to be a casual place where people can express their >opinions freely whether they are intellectually or emotionally motivated? - Dyske Suematsu I would like Rhizome to be a lively and respectful forum for new media artists to share their intellectually or emotionally motivated musings about the state of the art. I think the current structure is a really good one, it's just not as lively and respectful as it could be. Curt Cloninger expressed that "The achilles heel of rhizome is fear of critical discussion." I wonder if more energy could be harnessed if the members felt safer about participating. I share Curt's concerns. I am guilty of second and third guessing myself about what to say for fear of being horribly misunderstood by who knows and at what costs? I believe that if the environment felt more safe, the content on Rhizome might have a better chance of flourishing without having to touch the technology. The current structure would suggest that this is up to the membership. Rules of Engagement? A Constitution? Jason Van Anden + + + curt cloninger replied: Jason Van Anden wrote: > I believe that if the environment felt more safe, the content on > Rhizome might have a better chance of flourishing without having to > touch the technology. The current structure would suggest that this > is up to the membership. Rules of Engagement? A Constitution? I don't think so. The lack of any democratically sanctioned world view is the whole fun and challenge of rhizome. How can I carry on a logical conversation with someone who doesn't believe in aristotelian logic? How can I carry on a conversation about aesthetics with someone who doesn't beleive in aesthetics? In some extreme situations, how can I carry on a meaningful conversation with someone who doesn't believe meaningful conversations are possible or even desirable? Thus the boundries of the community are hammered out rhetorically, post after post. http://rhizome.org/info/index.php "we're tired of trees" is the mantra. did it happen? no. http://rhizome.org/baseims/navbar_subtitle.gif you can't have a rhizome "at" anywhere. "AT the new museum" is more than just semantics. it's proof that a pure rhizomatic social experience is not immune to other overarching control structures. but an agreed upon constitution isn't going to make it any more rhizomatic. So what do I want out of rhizome? When I first came to rhizome, I wanted to discover a like-minded community of creative folks who wanted to talk about art. I never quite discovered that (except for a handful of kindred spirits). What I did discover was different, but in some ways even more beneficial to me (although it took me a while to appreciate it). "Don't rock, wobble." - the bubblemen working from one end to the other / and all points in between, curt + + + Michael Szpakowski <szpako AT yahoo.com> added: < I am guilty of second and third guessing myself about what to say for fear of being horribly misunderstood by who knows and at what costs?> I still shudder when I think about my first post to Rhizome -it had lots of horrible manifesto like feeling and a fair degree of "LOOK AT ME!" to it. ..and its probably out there and accessible..arrgh! However since I decided to participate rather than shout ( I hope!) I have found the list to have the wonderful spin off of making me think through my ideas in a systematic way and attempting to argue them clearly. For me this has been of enormous personal benefit. I've also met some very interesting folk and discoverd a lot of things I didn't previously know. Furthermore I've come to respect a number of people whose views I largely reject and therefore at least carefully consider what they have to say, and, on occasion, I've had my mind changed. For me participation in the list has been literally a life changing activity but I do think a certain investment of time and energy is needed for participation to bear fruit. Also ..to be brutal about it.. if someone has something to say.. eventually they'll find the courage and foolishness to say it...this *is* a discussion list for grown ups and not a kindergarten. As for blogs ...well..fine.. let a hundred flowers bloom... but the glorious elegance and simplicity of the list form, with its slow burn and its cumulative impact, makes it unbeatable for me. best michael + + + ][mez][ <netwurker AT hotkey.net.au> added: At 04:33 AM 7/07/2004, you wrote: >Interesting points, Dyske. One of the broad questions in my mind was >hinted at in my earlier post: In the face of an increasingly growing >internet, and a much bigger new media arts world, how do you a) engage the >parts of it that are interesting to you and b) foster some sort of sense >of relationships and even (cough) community? .... when we r confronted with the _domestic_rigmarole of the net & the [its] x.tensions [s.pecially those that x.hibit characteristics that follow acceptable, regurgative modes of discourse] its tempting 2 slip in2|against these x.tensions, especially as they b.come de rigueur, shifting in2 the spotlite of contemporary text[ures].... ......1 way 2 n.courage this is assume lurker status periodically....normal ebbs N shifts occur here like everywhere, according 2 warps + wefts not blanket-obserable|perceivable..... ....those more akin with hardening them.selves with[in] coded|acceptable communication paradigms can perceive this lack of response as somehow damning, or indicative of a lack of overt engagement, rather than indicating other ][w][e][bs][dges of the net.work, the discursive shadowing in communica][do][tion, the patternings of data marrow of a sort that creeps out from under the hoopla & labels.....part of this is 2 accept the lull as a normative x.pression....silence as more than an indicator of non-partic[le]ipation..... perhaps this is my own bug-bear, but x.traction & x.pression still seem viable, even .here............... chunks, mez + + + Jason Van Anden replied: Has my original post been preempted? Dyske's well written thread (3 of 22) sets up an experiment to examine how invested the community is in actually reading each other's posts. The impetus for this was an actual conversation he and I and t.whid had in real life. I like Dyske's method. It's a very clever way to measure the participation of the membership. My original post (1 of 22) takes this ambivalence as fact, and questions whether the trend towards blogs dilutes a board like Raw. I feel that the thread was going in a really productive direction. I am concerned that focusing on how ambivalent and detached the memebership may be, doesn't address what can be done about it. If members felt more secure participating in this board, I feel that a lot more would decide to participate as a community, rather than opting to secede into their own blogs. This has less to do with how new technology can accomodate this activity, but rather how this already huge community could be motivated to become more invested. Jason Van Anden + + + Matthew Mascotte <mascotte AT mac.com> added: Michael. yes. me too. have found much and learned a bit more here. like the "slow burn" of this list as well. makes me consider my words...and i look forward each day to watching the flow which like most things runs rich sometimes and thin other times but there in lies its beauty. matthew + + + Alexander Galloway <galloway AT nyu.edu> added: i find this blog thread very interesting. these are some of the issues that we have wrestled with ever since the beginning of rhizome: the best way to exchange content collaboratively. a quick summary of what rhiz has attempted thus far (Francis--correct me if i'm wrong)... at the start of rhizome, mark tribe decided that the best way to navigate the signal-to-noise problem was to have two lists, one heavily moderated and one completely open. this resulted in the Digest/Raw format that has persisted since. people wanting a filter subscribed to Digest, while those who could handle the deluge subscribed to Raw. in the olden days the website was edited by the same person who edited Digest, and therefore ended up resembling the filtered email list rather then the unfiltered. eventually a web archive of Raw was added to balance things out a little. then, after a few years, rhizome switched over to a more decentralized format, handing the editorial selection for the website to a group of "superusers" who are able to pick which articles appear on the front page. as others have already pointed out in this thread, RSS feeds have fundamentally changed the landscape of the web. it's my opinion that rhizome might be ready for another redesign, one that can accommodate the aggregation and republishing functionality enabled by RSS. yes, email will always be the killer app, so of course some balance between email content and web feed content should be achieved. by way of contrast.. i've recently been hanging out over on the eyebeam reblog system (http://eyebeam.org/reblog/) and am currently coding version 2 of the backend (with much help from Jonah Peretti and Michael Frumin). reblog is formally quite similar to the current rhizome website in the sense that it has a community-fed text input system that is then parsed and republished on the site. reblog is simple, it takes an unlimited number of RSS feeds as input and lets you parse them into a single RSS feed as output. the main differences with rhiz i can see are 1) rhizome uses the emails posted to rhizome raw as its input channel, while reblog uses posts from about 80 web feeds, 2) rhizome uses a group of "superusers" who can publish articles on the website, while reblog uses a single rotating "guest reblogger" (a convention which could easily be changed in the future to include multiple simultaneous rebloggers). rhizome could conceivably reorganize itself around the reblog model, using both email and rhizomer blog feeds as the input. + + + Jason Van Anden replied: Hi Alex, Are you actually suggesting a Re-Re-Blog? It seems to me that Re-Blog does a really great job at what it does, so why would we need another? I don't see how a Rhizome Re-Blog would taste any different than the Eyebeam flavored one - the topics of interest are pretty much the same. The only obvious difference to me is the effect of many super users moderating instead of one rotating one. What if they endlessly Re-Blogged into one another? Jason Van Anden + + + Francis Hwang replied: Actually, I think it's much more promising to add individual blogs, for individual authors, than to have one more collectively moderated channel on Rhizome. The ecosystem of RSS users already has its own collective moderation, as drawn implicitly through the act of linking and tracked on search & indexing sites like Technorati, Blogdex, PubSub, Google, etc., etc., etc. There are, of course, group blogs out in the world, but with a well-armed RSS reader you can mix your channel anyway. Individually authored blogs are easier to code/maintain, too. I also have to say that I don't think it's at all guaranteed that email will always be the killer app. These days I get more than 5000 emails a week, and the overwhelming majority are spam ... client-side filtering doesn't work at this volume, legal measures will just push spammers into legal gray zones, and, various sender verification systems are making their way through the standards process but will take years to codify and implement. In the meantime, the upcoming versions of operating systems from both Redmond and Cupertino will include RSS readers ... the future of email as a one-to-many broadcast medium is by no means guaranteed, unfortunately. F. + + + Jason Van Anden replied: Those of us who have blogs, seem to think it would be super to connect them to Rhizome in some way. It seems like a good a way to maintain one's identity (autonomy, individuality, percieved star power...) while benefiting by the strength in numbers. From this vantage it provides the best of both worlds. Cool. The question still remains: how does facilitating the inclusion of blogs as part of Rhizome actually improve the service to the community and content it delivers? At what cost and at what benefit? I am convinced that more focus should be on fostering community involvement rather than encouraging it's diffusion. It takes a village... Jason Van Anden + + + Francis Hwang replied: Multi-replies below: On Jul 7, 2004, at 6:41 PM, Jason Van Anden wrote: > The question still remains: how does facilitating the inclusion of > blogs as part of Rhizome actually improve the service to the community > and content it delivers? At what cost and at what benefit? I am > convinced that more focus should be on fostering community involvement > rather than encouraging it's diffusion. When you say "community involvement", Jason, what sort of involvement do you have in mind? On Jul 7, 2004, at 5:00 PM, Joy Garnett wrote: > in that case, would it be possible/worthwhile to add a blogroll to > rhizome somehow? someone (superusers?) would have to choose what blogs > to subscribe to... Well I was just imagining that each blogger would get her own individual blogroll. No need to aggregate them all together. F. + + + Jason Van Anden replied: Thanks for asking Francis. I am not going to be able to post again until tommorrow, and I am still formulating what it is exactly that I mean, but here is where I am currently at: Community Involvement == What can be done to inspire the Rhizome membership be more motivated to participate in it's success? My insistence on focusing the discussion on "community involvement" is a continuation of thoughts that I had after you reported the very low particpation in this year's gaming commission voter turnout. The system you had created was wonderfully conceived, and executed - so it was not for lack of trying. It amazed me that so many members did not take advantage of this unique opportunity. How come? How do you motivate individuals to cooperate? Not a new question for most life forms sharing the planet - and for good reason (ie: bees and flowers, the creation of the city state, slashdot). I do not think that this has anything to do with technology, but rather human nature. Artists of course, are ten times more protective of their autonomy as most, thus the current trend to homestead many mini-Rhizomes (uni-blogs?) all over the net instead of collaborating. Darwin would predict that this will eventually lead to a few strong blogs succeeding, and most failing. As people start to weigh the cost/benefit of this reality, collaborative blogs will evolve. Thing is, we already have this in the form of Rhizome. I would like to skip to step two, accept that pooling resources is for the common good and expedite the process. Recognizing that these ideas are not new, I ordered two books: "Protocol" and "Bowling Alone". Perhaps they will shed more light on the topic. Jason Van Anden www.smileproject.com + + + Francis Hwang replied: Interesting points, Jason. Though I might argue that you're putting the cart before the horse. Let me go out on a limb and say this: I think Rhizome's success is sort of a boring stupid thing to have to worry about. I mean, obviously I think about it, but I think its success is a lot less interesting than the success of a) new media arts as a whole, and b) the possibility of destabilizing the hierarchical nature of discourse in the arts. Or: "More rock, more talk." I like to think that if Rhizome helps those other things succeed, it itself will succeed, but of course nothing is guaranteed and nothing lasts forever. I'll also say that Rhizome tries to provide lots of different services, and some of them are less cooperative than others. Text discussion in an email list is fairly cooperative and intimate, but getting your work into the ArtBase is fairly solitary: You do your work, you submit it, you shepherd it through the archival process. You might exchange a lot of email with Kevin if you submit an artwork, but you won't be relying on the collective judgement of Rhizome members to do it. (For now. There's nothing that says that couldn't be changed in the future.) Commissions voting is probably somewhere in the middle. Yes, I was disappointed by the low turnout, but overall I wasn't disappointed with the result. The main point of commissions wasn't to give me warm fuzzies about the Rhizome community; it was to award money to artists so they could spend time on doing good art, and in that we succeeded. I was pleased (though not surprised) that the community-chosen selection was as good as the others. And my disappointment with turnout is still mostly focused on that single goal: More turnout might mean better publicity and more interesting grant applications, which might translate into more money for artists the next year. (Also, I don't particularly think voting necessarily counts as "cooperative", since conflicts are resolved using a dry mathematical formula. In my mind cooperation involves trying to figure out what might make others happy and then actively seeking compromise with that in mind. Wikis are cooperative. Divvying up household chores with your roommates is cooperative. Voting is more like "politely competitive", maybe.) Anyway, another point worth addressing is the notion of what it means to have a blog succeed. I'll say this: The vast majority of blogs out there do not have huge audiences, but that's only failure if you expected to be the next Slashdot. For most people they're not like bullhorns in the town square. They're like a family Christmas card. But those are pretty nice, anyway. My youngest brother just went to South Korea for a few months, and he set up his own blog about it. This blog isn't going to get him a book deal or a pundit spot on MSNBC, but I can read it to get updates about what's going in his life. That stuff matters, and I'm glad he's doing it. (Of course, I had to email him to tell him to add an RSS feed, and I'm not sure when he'll get around to that. Tech ain't perfect.) Francis + + + Jason Van Anden replied: I did not mean to imply that blogs are bad things that should not exist, nor that I feel that Rhizome is in trouble. Since both things are new to me, that would be really rude. I have personally benefitted from my involvement in Rhizome in countless ways, and I only joined this year. I know I said in my last post that I would not be able to post again until tomorrow, but on the drive home I started to wonder if I had side-stepped Francis's question. I did not mean to, but I don't think I actually answered it. I am not super-prepared to answer it right now, but off the cuff, here is a totally made up example: Let's say that someone had an idea for a website called "artornot.com" (apparently not very original idea - domain already taken - I checked), to be used as a open forum for new media art criticism and discussion. Let's say that this was a really good idea (just). I think it would be great if that person was encouraged to come to this community with the idea, with the possibility that it would get support (developmental, moral, financial, coding, etc...) from other members, rather than letting it rot on the vine because of lack of personal resources (time, money, faith). I see an institution like Rhizome as being in a unique position to facilitate this kind of community activity. As I am writing this, I am thinking about what Dyske said in a much earlier thread - perhaps it is my responsibility to initiate such things. Feedback appreciated. Jason Van Anden www.smileproject.com + + + Curt Cloninger replied: Jason Van Anden wrote: > I see an institution like Rhizome as being in a unique position to > facilitate this kind of community activity. As I am writing this, I > am thinking about what Dyske said in a much earlier thread - perhaps > it is my responsibility to initiate such things. Hi Jason, I'm part of this initiative in my hometown: http://themap.org we spent all this time focusing up, getting corporate sponsorships and local government endorsement and professional consultations and a 5 phase implementation plan, etc.; but none of that stuff in and of itself makes a creative scene. A scene is probably better instigated by a bunch of sleep-deprived freaks with no funding, sitting in the basement mixing up the medicine. One can prototype and technologize and discuss ad infinitum, but if the energy and interest is not there at a root level, it simply won't materialize. As you say, it has to do with motivating humans. As Bill Burroughs said, "Every man a god, that is if ye can qualify. You can't be the god of anything unless you can do it." I admire artist who just started making cool stuff from the ground up. Daniel Johnston recorded his original songs onto lo-fi mono one-track cassette tapes and just walked around downtown Austin, Texas, wandering up to strangers and giving the tapes away. Howard Finster was refurbishing old bicycles for poor kids when he saw a face in a paint smudge, then he drew the face, then he heard the voice of God telling him to take a dollar bill out of his pocket and draw it. Finster protested, "But I can't draw." God responded, "How do you know? How do you know? How do you know?" So Finster drew the dollar, then he drew some pictures of Abraham Lincoln, then he spends the rest of his life making brilliant cool messed up shit. Or my man Al Sacui, still going strong and off the radar: http://gisol.org/ So I'd say if you have a mind to start using rhizome to do something, start using it to do something and see what happens. I'm not trying to squelch the dialogue, and I hope something good comes of it, but you don't have to wait on Francis before you attempt to reinvigorate rhizome. You just have to motivate a bunch of very busy, spread-thin creative folks with varied goals and different understandings of what art is "good for." + + + jeremy added: Jason, i like where you are taking this. Going off of what you said,..... "I see an institution like Rhizome as being in a unique position to facilitate this kind of community activity." So I was thinking....... What if there was a site (RHIZOME?) that had a pool of members.. and each week there were 3(?) featured Artists on some part of the site. And as a member you are required to participate in 2 out of the 3 discussions a week for a months time in order to obtain a spot on the rotating weekly calendar. Once you have a months worth of time in,.. your name goes up on the list and you become available to show your work when your name comes around. If you want to wait, or you have nothing to show at the time,. that is fine. you can always join the rotating weekly schedule when you have something to show, as long as you are maintaining your monthly discussion dues. If you stop contributing for lets say,... 2 wks then you have to star over. You just need to contribute to the energy of the discussion in order to get in line... and you need to maintain your presence in the discussion if you want to be in the schedule in the future. it is simple. And if you keep the rotation going fast enough, like weekly... you will get enough discussion in and maintain relative interest in the process. I think this would be a great way to encourage involvement, and generate energy and lively evolving discussion. I have been looking for ways to talk about art as much as the process of the industry we are involved in. I would like to see the discussions branch out beyond the art, and into our presentation of our art,.. and our administrative duties as artists (taxes, resumes, proposals, bios, archive..etc.) Talking about the art will get us all farther in our work, reshaping the system we work in will help us to define the art, and becoming clearer in our paperwork will help us to continue doing what we do. Is this too much to ask of a community? I guess the worst case scenario is that you are forced to give constructive criticism to someone who's work you dont understand... in which case, i am sure they could use some help with clarifying their artist statement. :) Let me know what you guys think. I would be happy to contribute my skills to making anything happen. I would like to see this go beyond what it is, and i dont know that i have completely bought into the Blog vs Board argument. I dont know that either is the solution. I like having my email right here in front of me. I dont want to have to go to some website to participate, unless i was getting something more out it than an ordinary Blog. -jeremy + + + liza sabater <liza AT culturekitchen.com> added: Hi Jason, I've followed with interest this thread and was going to post a meta-response but there's too much for that. On Sunday, Jul 4, 2004, at 10:31 America/New_York, Jason Van Anden wrote: I am a fairly new member to the Rhizome community. When I first discovered Rhizome, I was excited to find a forum of artists with common interests and concerns, and looked forward to the discussions that would take place, and that I could take place in. Since I joined a few months ago, there have only been a few sustained threads, while the archives are filled with lively and fascinating discussion. What happened? Fatigue. Other interests. Growth. The recent survey requesting community interest in a blog service via Rhizome has caused me to wonder if this is because of some trend; moving away from boards, and towards blogs. A little more than a year ago I started talking to people here in NYC about blogs; about how I would love to see art sites with XML feeds and such because, well, I'm lazy and hate browsers. Not that I am asking people to give up use of the browser but to look at the technology of blogs as the real way to build a rhizome (not this art site but the concept as per Deleuze and Guattari). But mainly, it's because I'm lazy, I want to metaweb art sites and hate bookmarks. TWhid was part of that round of conversations. Alex, Francis and others. Also, technologically speaking, there is an enthusiasm and energy around blogs very much like the one that brought the net art scene back in 1996. Explorations on the possibilities of the semantic web are pushing the envelope on technologies such as XML, Atom, trackbacks, CSS, PhP. And the new hot thing is anything social or like they say at Corante, YASNS (yet another social networking software). Orkut or Friendster anyone? If so, I wonder what the ramifications of this may be. In some ways, blogs and boards are the similar, they both enable ongoing, two way communication. The clear difference is that a blog is run by it's moderator, which changes the dynamic, a lot. Blogs have no more of a moderator than an email list. You are comparing apples with oranges. Blogs can be scaled vertically via RSS whereas there is no way of doing that with an elist unless you RSSscrap it or hack a feed (which someone did so a while back for Rhizome). Still, hacked feeds like that are not malleable. If everyone runs their own blog, everyone is a moderator, and system becomes decentralized. This requires more effort by the blog owner and his/her audience. The person running the blog needs to keep things interesting enough to keep people visiting, the audience needs to keep track of many blogs instead of one. That's what a rhizome is supposed to be : http://rhizome.org/info/index.php "To these centered systems [arborescent structures], the authors contrast acentered systems, finite networks of automata in which communication runs from any neighbor to another, the stems or channels do not preexist, and all individuals are interchangeable, defined only by their state at a given moment--such that the local operations are coordinated and the final, global result synchronized without a central agency." What I want to bring into light is your comment about effort. Blogs are not things. They are technologies. Software that is meant to manage a site by separating the structure (HTML/PHP), from the design (CSS) and the content (TXT). So if you are used to creating sites with Dreamweaver, yeah, the thought is daunting. But as someone who is not a software developer, I have to say that there is nothing better for easily managing a site than a CMS. Now, does that mean that you should give up on artsy-fartsy sites? No. What it means is that artists need to think strategically about their sites. That the art stay separate from the actual management of the site. To use the CMS as a way of archiving and curating your site. Tina LaPorta the other said to me "As net artists, we've lost out way". It came out of a conversation that net art was supposed to be about decentralization, the rhizome, nomadism and as it is it's become institutionalized. So in effect, the first wave of net artists basically emulated online the very systems they sought to by-pass offline in order to show/disseminate their art. Is this bad? I don't think so because, really, social networking software like wikis and blogs, for example, have exploded in the last 2 years. Rhizome and the first wave of net artists has been around since 1996. Their old farts in web / technology years if you think about it. At the time that I discovered Rhizome, I also discovered a lot of other on-line resources influenced by it. After doing an unscientific cost/benefits analysis, I decided that the service that Rhizome provides as a centralized and democratic community was the best one, and decided to become a member. Rhizome is centralized but is not a democratic community. It was never set up to work like that. Rhizome comes out of a salon / atelier / studio / gallery / museum tradition. It's about centralizing art. So that's where the technology for the site went. It's not a good or bad thing, BTW. The rhizome at Rhizome is a metaphor but not an actual realization of the blueprints given out by D&G*. That has happened with CMS. The technologies developed for blogging come from two traditions : Online link logging and self publishing. So the onus of disseminating a site is taken on by the blogger because, if they don't do it nobody will. And the links have become a way of not just acknowledging influences of showing love to other bloggers but of creating prestige ranking: of not only showing your influences but assessing your influence on others. Personally, this meant that I devote some of my time (and ego) for the greater good of the group, by posting my opinions and reactions to topics of interest, in one place. With blogs, that new place is the feed reader. To read about feeds go to : http://news.yahoo.com/rss For what feed readers do, check out NetNewsWire at http://www.ranchero.com I believe that a socialist-democracy (the ideal of Rhizome) is a much better way for this community to thrive than anarchy (fractured, poorly maintained blogs). Sorry but your analogy is hollow. Educate yourself a bit more about how the technologies work and then come back to that. I still have not read Alex Galloway's Protocol but I have on my site an essay he wrote with Eugene Thacker called the Limits of Networking. It's brilliant. Check it out at http://www.culturekitchen.com/archives/000574.html In order for this to happen, I think that members need to deliberately devote their resources to the good of the board than their own blogs. I will be publishing this weekend a long post on metablogging the net art world. Hopefully it will be informative enough about the importance and utility of CMS technology for net artists. Given that we all have a finite amount of time to devote to our art, our day-jobs, and so on, I am interested in why members feel it is better to blog than to participate in a board. Quick thoughts : Vertical scaling (metaweb), categories, archives, networking, diffusion, dissemination, the rhizome. More to come. [...] You cannot compare the typical blog with Rhizome. It would be more like does "Gawker" get more traffic than Rhizome or something like that. And still it's not a good comparison because longevity + hits has a lot to do with ranking on places like Google.\\[...] David has a great post on Many-to-Many at Corante. It's called Redefining Friendship http://www.corante.com/many/archives/2004/07/07/ redefining_friendship.php What I found interesting a year ago (and still do) is how the technology of blogs are CONCRETELY changing the web; whereas 8 years ago net art redefined the web METAPHORICALLY --including this here site. + + + twhid replied: I post more often to my own site then to Rhiz, here's why: 1. I have complete control over linking No one can put any sort of impediment in front of it for any reason (even a little $5 fee). 2. I have complete control over availability My posts will be there for as long as I choose. Rhiz could go under. I'm not going to close-up shop on my web site until the day I die. Look what happened to the Walker's new media program... 3. I find I'm a better person when I'm posting to my own site. I share more instead of making a public pose. I'm much less likely to flame and complain. I don't know why but I'm less reactionary. (of course this is my own issue...) 4. It's less aggressive. (this is related to point 3) Blogs are passive; email lists are much more aggressive PUSH media. 5. I can syndicate (this is related to 1) RSS baby > <snip> >> > > What I want to bring into light is your comment about effort. Blogs > are not things. They are technologies. Software that is meant to > manage a site by separating the structure (HTML/PHP), from the design > (CSS) and the content (TXT). So if you are used to creating sites with > Dreamweaver, yeah, the thought is daunting. But as someone who is not > a software developer, I have to say that there is nothing better for > easily managing a site than a CMS. Now, does that mean that you should > give up on artsy-fartsy sites? No. What it means is that artists need > to think strategically about their sites. That the art stay separate > from the actual management of the site. To use the CMS as a way of > archiving and curating your site. > > Tina LaPorta the other said to me "As net artists, we've lost out > way". It came out of a conversation that net art was supposed to be > about decentralization, the rhizome, nomadism and as it is it's become > institutionalized. So in effect, the first wave of net artists > basically emulated online the very systems they sought to by-pass > offline in order to show/disseminate their art. Is this bad? I don't > think so because, really, social networking software like wikis and > blogs, for example, have exploded in the last 2 years. Rhizome and the > first wave of net artists has been around since 1996. Their old farts > in web / technology years if you think about it. I'm need to comment on this 'net artists lost their way' thing. I don't see net artists losing their way. There isn't as much of it going on, it's not as exciting and new as it was, but to say, "we've lost our way" simply makes lots and lots of assumptions about what net artists were thinking about in the early days. I for one didn't think all that much about rhizomatic structures or nomadism (nomadism?). I was more excited about the fact that I, ME, JUST LITTLE OLE ME, had access to a mass medium! That was what excited me. Also, most newer net art projects use decentralized, networked processes in the make-up of the work even if it's being supported by centralized art world institutions. [...] >> I believe that a socialist-democracy (the ideal of Rhizome) is a much >> better way for this community to thrive than anarchy (fractured, >> poorly maintained blogs). > > Sorry but your analogy is hollow. Educate yourself a bit more about > how the technologies work and then come back to that. I still have not > read Alex Galloway's Protocol but I have on my site an essay he wrote > with Eugene Thacker called the Limits of Networking. It's brilliant. > Check it out at http://www.culturekitchen.com/archives/000574.html Yeah, I wouldn't make that analogy either, that is, anarchy=blogs, that really doesn't make any sense to me. My experience in blogland is it maintains a very democratic nature as there is no one voice of authority or mechanism of centralization. Of course some voices rise to the top (in the web design field for instance, there are a few 'main' bloggers: Zeldman, stopdesign, What do i know, mezzoblue, k10k, etc). But the same thing happens on a discussion board but it's much harder to create one's own filter of the leading voices in a field. Similar blog voices link via their post links, their blogrolls, their comment links, their trackbacks, etc. The mechanism of grouping or networking therefor is decentralized; if one blog goes down, much like the Internet, it doesn't tear down the entire network of blogs in a field. We need that desperately in the new media/net art world. If Rhizome goes out tomorrow, what becomes of the artbase? the texts? our RAW clubhouse? It's gone. + + + liza sabater replied: On Tuesday, Jul 6, 2004, at 13:53 America/New_York, Dyske Suematsu wrote: In fact, someone does need to experiment with new technologies, for the rest of us to be able to use them appropriately. The question as a director of IT is: Is my role to explore the possibilities of new technologies, or to use them to serve a certain purpose? I find that many directors of IT end up doing the former because it is more exciting, better for their careers, and offers more recognition for their achievements. It is rare to see IT directors who put objectives before the allure of new technologies. I've personally witnessed millions of dollars go down the toilet because of these tendencies of IT directors. Completely agree with this. Just to reinforce my opinion about the 'culture' that this new service will be serving. I have just finished designing a blog for Napier's potatoland. Not ready to launch yet but once I finish the post on metablogging, I'll be pointing to some examples of how I will be using the site for archival / curatorial purposes. There are people out there actually using blogging technology to create art. Will give some of those as well. But these possibilities might not be available to users if you are centralizing the system. If decentralized, how different would that make you from TypePad? Then there is the kind of licensing you may be using for the software itself; the amount of blogs allowed per user, etc. etc. [...] The poster-child for metawebbing and vertical scaling has to be this site : http://www.electrokin.com/netart_links.htm Net Artists should kiss the feet of people like Christiane Paul or Curt Cloninger. I have no idea how they do it, really. Clicking one bookmark at a time? Is that the best net artists can do? And don't get me started with those all-flash-all-the-time sites. Really, keeping track net art is like trying to give cats a bath. [...] On Tuesday, Jul 6, 2004, at 23:59 America/New_York, curt cloninger wrote: So what do I want out of rhizome? When I first came to rhizome, I wanted to discover a like-minded community of creative folks who wanted to talk about art. I never quite discovered that (except for a handful of kindred spirits). What I did discover was different, but in some ways even more beneficial to me (although it took me a while to appreciate it). This makes me think of the house of greek parents in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding". It's funny how the house was built to keep the Exenos from coming in. What I like about having a blog is that I have no idea who will get hooked into it. I am the #3 search choice for spongemonkeys and #6 for masturbation month http://www.google.com/search?q=spongemonkeys&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 http://www.google.com/search?q=masturbation+month&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 No I have not been masturbating for a month with spongemonkeys (although I should post something like that and see what happens). Anyhow, it's been interesting to see some of the comments on these and other topics. Then there are the personal emails I receive from people that, once I visit their sites I go, WOW! now I know why they 'clicked' with what I write. You just don't get that on a gated community. Need the traffic or pedestrians, runners, strollers and transients. That's what makes blogs rhizomatic. [...] > i find this blog thread very interesting. these are some of the issues > that we have wrestled with ever since the beginning of rhizome: the > best way to exchange content collaboratively. True. > a quick summary of what rhiz has attempted thus far (Francis--correct > me if i'm wrong)... at the start of rhizome, mark tribe decided that > the best way to navigate the signal-to-noise problem was to have two > lists, one heavily moderated and one completely open. this resulted in > the Digest/Raw format that has persisted since. people wanting a > filter subscribed to Digest, while those who could handle the deluge > subscribed to Raw. in the olden days the website was edited by the > same person who edited Digest, and therefore ended up resembling the > filtered email list rather then the unfiltered. eventually a web > archive of Raw was added to balance things out a little. then, after a > few years, rhizome switched over to a more decentralized format, > handing the editorial selection for the website to a group of > "superusers" who are able to pick which articles appear on the front > page. So the decision came out of the main technology email. Since you're the Perl guy Alex, did you know about blogging systems when you were building R1 or R2? I am assuming you did not because the technology really did not explode until about 2 years ago and you were already done with the site. Correct? I really want this information because ... well ... inquiring minds want to know. I really want to know the details of the process for building the site. > as others have already pointed out in this thread, RSS feeds have > fundamentally changed the landscape of the web. it's my opinion that > rhizome might be ready for another redesign, one that can accommodate > the aggregation and republishing functionality enabled by RSS. yes, > email will always be the killer app, so of course some balance between > email content and web feed content should be achieved. That would be a huge undertaking. You already have the chops with PhP and there's a lot of nifty things done with it that surpass what is accomplished with the mere mortal HTML CMS site but, I'm thinking more of the structure of Rhizome itself. This is social software after all. How are you going to manage the socialization on the site and why. Two big questions to answer before going ahead with a redesign of that nature. > by way of contrast.. i've recently been hanging out over on the > eyebeam reblog system Hanging out? Hogging it is more like it. Get off it! I want to reblog <pout> <pout> > (http://eyebeam.org/reblog/) and am currently coding version 2 of the > backend (with much help from Jonah Peretti and Michael Frumin). reblog > is formally quite similar to the current rhizome website in the sense > that it has a community-fed text input system that is then parsed and > republished on the site. Nononononono. It is edited. It is not a regular feed where anything would be aggregated unfiltered. It is definitely not conventional XML aggregation and Jonah wanted it that way because they wanted a moderated aggregation to the site. Correct? > reblog is simple, it takes an unlimited number of RSS feeds as input > and lets you parse them into a single RSS feed as output. the main > differences with rhiz i can see are 1) rhizome uses the emails posted > to rhizome raw as its input channel, while reblog uses posts from > about 80 web feeds, 2) rhizome uses a group of "superusers" who can > publish articles on the website, while reblog uses a single rotating > "guest reblogger" (a convention which could easily be changed in the > future to include multiple simultaneous rebloggers). The advantage of 1 list to 80 blogs is huge and that is what I mean by vertical scaling. > rhizome could conceivably reorganize itself around the reblog model, > using both email and rhizomer blog feeds as the input. Absolutely. Yahoo! has an RSS for their open email lists. So the model has been proven. I have to dig for the link to that feature but have used it. [...] On Wednesday, Jul 7, 2004, at 16:20 America/New_York, Francis Hwang wrote: > Actually, I think it's much more promising to add individual blogs, > for individual authors, than to have one more collectively moderated > channel on Rhizome. The ecosystem of RSS users already has its own > collective moderation, as drawn implicitly through the act of linking > and tracked on search & indexing sites like Technorati, Blogdex, > PubSub, Google, etc., etc., etc. There are, of course, group blogs out > in the world, but with a well-armed RSS reader you can mix your > channel anyway. The question still is who gets to blog for Rhizome. Payers of the service? Members who already have blogs? A mix of both? And then how would that be reflected on the site? Just simple aggregation or by the # links to a certain post or by the # comments? How is all that technology going to be put to use to fulfill the needs of Rhizome? > Individually authored blogs are easier to code/maintain, too. Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on the user. The issue here is that you have a very small % of net art people using blogs. So your focus may well be about educating people on how to use them. Most net art people equate blogs with just writing and have no idea how to use it for their own art purposes. > > I also have to say that I don't think it's at all guaranteed that > email will always be the killer app. These days I get more than 5000 > emails a week, and the overwhelming majority are spam ... client-side > filtering doesn't work at this volume, legal measures will just push > spammers into legal gray zones, and, various sender verification > systems are making their way through the standards process but will > take years to codify and implement. In the meantime, the upcoming > versions of operating systems from both Redmond and Cupertino will > include RSS readers ... the future of email as a one-to-many broadcast > medium is by no means guaranteed, unfortunately. > That is true to. Push media, due to spamming, is going the way of ... well... telemarketing and spamming. + + + Jason Van Anden replied: This discussion, by it's very existence, actually does a good job of illustrating why I brought this topic up. How would this discussion be realized on a blog? How would you know about it? Who would be motivated to contribute to it? The thoughtful contributions from the membership have motivated me to contiue to participate in this ongoing discussion. I feel like I have spent my time well. Jason Van Anden www.smileproject.com + + + jeremy replied: LIZA did a fine job today of sewing together a series of posts on this subject. I felt like i was reading a blog. I enjoyed reading them, but i became turned off to the whole thing after a while. She made me take a look at RSS. I dont really understand what it is yet,. but she got my curiosity peaked. I do know that i like recieving Rhisome via email for the very fact that i feel like i am in a neutral environment. (this is just an illusion in my head) however, i could easily see my self taking part in a rhizome blog if the discussion were ALIVE. I am looking forward to helping out in any way possible. I would like to get something going. + + + Joy Garnett replied: This discussion has brought up everything for me--everything that I've been struggling with for the past 4 years of editing newsgrist and trying to make it work. Ha! Liza has indeed done an amazing job of tieing it all together. What remains for me to say is perhaps personal, and I hope a little bit useful here: ironically, newsgrist started as an adverse reaction to Rhizome flame wars and my own irritation with Raw -- ah, the good old days. (Alex, please don't laugh!) But those were also pre-RSS pre-blog days. I started a news digest (c. 2000) because I wanted editorial control as well as "reach"-- in those days that killer app was not yet bogged down by spam or worminess. Also and most important: I felt the painful gap between one art community, which at that point was starkly Luddite, and the digital/ net scene, which had basically changed my life and my work in untold and amazing ways. The gap wrankled me (still does). So newsgrist set about its mission in a proto-bloggy fashion: it wanted to build a community through distribution and sharing of info, not unlike Phil Agre's Red Rock Reader list, if anyone remembers that phenom. At that stage it was very much a landscape of lists. and of course, bbs. Anyway, long story short: this year I finally decided to shift newsgrist into blogdom. There is no point in ignoring RSS etc. BUT at the same time, the idea of abandoning a carefully taylored and large subscriber list made no sense (abandon all my subscribers?). So instead of emailing out a news digest (which gets archived on a website that no one visits) I blog and blog and blog...and then send out a news digest to my as yet non-bloggy subscribers--a digest of the blog itself. The links are almost all permalinks so they will be led to the non-bloggy, should they choose to click, new newsgrist blog, and hence (and this is the idea) to other blogs; to the world of blogs. So my idea: to create some kind of bridge between a passive community that barely looks at the web, that likes to receive email (they used to be the Luddites) and a bloggy world of aggregators and feeds. One thing leads to another. Even successful (um, $$$) blog entrpeneurs like Nick Denton (Gawker, Wonkette, FleshBot, etc.) are trying to figure out how to drive the non-bloggy community into the blog market--that's the idea behind sites like Kinja.com. But my feeling is that we don't have to be absolutists: there are uses for blogs, for boards, for email lists---they all serve different needs, different communities even. Reality is hybrid. I don't know that Rhizome really needs to change radically right now--Net Art News being their feed, their way of drawing both bloggers and non-bloggers (net art news subscribers). Perhaps the real question is: Are any of the current modes that Rhizome employs expendable? Or is it rather a question of adding something new? Hmmmm. best, Joy http://newsgrist.typepad.com http://imvoting.com + + + Jason Van anden replied: Wow. Lots to think about. I want to respond to the points made by, well, everyone - but I need to digest it all, and have the free moment to write it responsibly. I hope to be able to do this sometime over the weekend. Perhaps it is not necessary to say this, perhaps it is even self-centered and presumptuous, but at the expense of sounding square... I have to admit that I often wait in anticipation for a reply to my posts. I think it is about a yearning for recognition, and relying on feedback from others for some sort of self-actualization - interesting topics for therapy at any rate, or perhaps the reason I chose to pursue art. I am new at this kind of interaction, so maybe this does not need to be brought up, the informal protocol of this medium excuses the need to. I would hate to think that someone felt dismissed because of the pause, especially given the amount of effort members have invested in their contributions. [...] Joy is not the first person to have referenced the legendary Rhizome "Flame Wars" as being the beginning of some sort of Rhizome schism. Was it ever documented, analysed, made into a prequel? If not, can someone bring me up to date? Really curious. + + + Lee Wells added: Dear Liza: Art is not about blogging. Blogging is about art. + + + Rob Myers replied: On 10 Jul 2004, at 15:41, Lee Wells wrote: > Art is not about blogging. > Blogging is about art. There's always "Whistler's Blogger"... More seriously there's Belle du Jour (etc.), blogs as literature (allegedly). I *don't* think Rhizome Raw would be better as a blog. I like the peculiar mix of press releases, ASCII art and chit-chat that is this list. I like the volume of traffic. And I like the semi-private nature of the list. Rhizome Raw would be a late and redundant entry to the blogging arena. As a mailing list it's something very special. - Rob. + + + jeremy replied: I dont understand RSS enough,. but it seems like it would be a happy medium in between the two. And besides, any system has flaws, which will ultimately be exploited and used to create beautiful havoc. And if those flaws are not being exploited, then we will be here to see that they are. Let it change and evolve, and move on. I am more interested in seeing what things come out of a change, than what could come from using the same tired methods. -jeremy + + + Jason Van Anden replied: I think the artornot.com example was a poor choice. Liza wrote: >That would mean changing the whole structure of how the (non-profit) business of >Rhizome is run. It's not just about the technology. This was an attempt to answer Francis's question about what I meant by community participation. My example was not meant to suggest that we should be developing profitable products umbrellaed under the Rhizome brand. Later posts by Joy Garnett and T.Whid actually illustrate my point much better. Disenfranchised by activities going on within the Rhizome community, they were motivated to start their own blogs: T.Whid had a problem with the fee structure, Joy Garnett with the flame wars. Clearly both of these members contribute (a lot) regardless or I would not know this, however, this suggests to me that this board is quieter since they decided to focus their efforts on their blogs. I think both Joy and T.Whid have excellent blogs, so perhaps it is not a bad thing that they were inspired to do what they do. But doesn't this suggest that this board (and community) might be more active if members were more motivated to focus their thoughts and idea here instead? Jason Van Anden www.smileproject.com + + + Francis Hwang replied: On Jul 9, 2004, at 6:31 PM, liza sabater wrote: > > On Wednesday, Jul 7, 2004, at 16:20 America/New_York, Francis Hwang > wrote: >> Actually, I think it's much more promising to add individual blogs, >> for individual authors, than to have one more collectively moderated >> channel on Rhizome. The ecosystem of RSS users already has its own >> collective moderation, as drawn implicitly through the act of linking >> and tracked on search & indexing sites like Technorati, Blogdex, >> PubSub, Google, etc., etc., etc. There are, of course, group blogs >> out in the world, but with a well-armed RSS reader you can mix your >> channel anyway. > > The question still is who gets to blog for Rhizome. Payers of the > service? Members who already have blogs? A mix of both? And then how > would that be reflected on the site? Just simple aggregation or by the > # links to a certain post or by the # comments? How is all that > technology going to be put to use to fulfill the needs of Rhizome? I don't think there will be such a thing as blogging "for Rhizome", as you put it. Although we haven't really nailed down how much this will cost per person (and accordingly how we'd want to charge for it), more or less anybody who'll want one can get one. There's no vetting or anything like that. You can come and blog about Holocaust revisionism for all I want, I don't care. (Though if you were into that sort of thing you might be better off somewhere else, because if you don't care about integration into the Rhizome community then there's not much reason to blog here.) There are a lot of different ways that the proposed blogs could be integrated into the rest of the site: Personally I think this needs to be rolled into some sort of design/usability review though I'm not sure when we'll find the time. So, to give you a sort of weasely non-committal answer: We're very interested in reflecting this in the site in lots of different ways but don't know exactly how we'll do it. F. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome.org is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and an affiliate of the New Museum of Contemporary Art. Rhizome Digest is supported by grants from The Charles Engelhard Foundation, The Rockefeller Foundation, The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, and with public funds from the New York State Council on the Arts, a state agency. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Rhizome Digest is filtered by Kevin McGarry (kevin AT rhizome.org). ISSN: 1525-9110. Volume 9, number 28. Article submissions to list AT rhizome.org are encouraged. Submissions should relate to the theme of new media art and be less than 1500 words. For information on advertising in Rhizome Digest, please contact info AT rhizome.org. To unsubscribe from this list, visit http://rhizome.org/subscribe. Subscribers to Rhizome Digest are subject to the terms set out in the Member Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php. Please invite your friends to visit Rhizome.org on Fridays, when the site is open to members and non-members alike. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + |
-RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.12.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.5.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.27.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.20.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.13.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.6.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.30.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.23.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.16.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.9.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.2.08 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.19.2007 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.12.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.5.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.28.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.21.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.14.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.7.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.31.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.24.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.17.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.10.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.3.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.26.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.19.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.12.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.5.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.29.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.22.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.15.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.8.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.1.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.25.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.18.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.11.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.4.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.27.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.20.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.13.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.6.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.30.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.23.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.16.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.9.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.2.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.25.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.18.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.11.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.4.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.28.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.14.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.28.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.14.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.7.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.31.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.24.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.17.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.03.07 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.20.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.13.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: November 29, 2006 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.22.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.15.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.08.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.27.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.20.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.13.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.29.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.22.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.15.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.08.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 09.01.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.25.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.18.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.11.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 08.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.28.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.21.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.14.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 07.07.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.30.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.23.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.16.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.02.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.26.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.19.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.12.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 05.05.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.28.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.21.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.14.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.07.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.31.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.24.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.17.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.12.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.03.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.24.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.17.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.10.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.03.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.27.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.20.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.13.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.06.06 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.30.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.23.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.16.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.09.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.02.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.25.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.18.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.11.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.4.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.28.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.21.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.14.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.07.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.30.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.23.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.16.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.9.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.2.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.26.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.22.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.14.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.07.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.31.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.24.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.17.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.10.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.03.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.26.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.19.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.12.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.05.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.29.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.22.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.15.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.08.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.29.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.22.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.15.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.01.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.25.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.18.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.11.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.04.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.25.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.18.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.11.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.04.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.28.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.21.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.14.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.08.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.01.05 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.17.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.10.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.03.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.26.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.19.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.12.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.05.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.29.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.22.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.15.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.08.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.01.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.24.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.17.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.10.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.03.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.27.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.20.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.13.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.06.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.30.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.23.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.16.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.09.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.02.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.25.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.18.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.11.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.04.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.28.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.21.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.14.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.07.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.30.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.16.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.09.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 04.02.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.27.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.19.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.13.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 03.05.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.27.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.20.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.13.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 02.06.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.31.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.23.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.16.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.10.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 01.05.04 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.21.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.13.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.05.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.28.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.21.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.14.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.07.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.31.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.25.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.18.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.10.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.03.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.27.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.19.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.13.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.05.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.29.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.22.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.17.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.09.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.17.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.10.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.03.03 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.20.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.13.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.06.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.29.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.22.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.15.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 11.01.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.25.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.18.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.11.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 10.04.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.27.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.20.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.13.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 9.6.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.30.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.23.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.16.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST:8.9.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 8.02.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.26.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.19.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.12.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 7.5.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.28.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.21.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.14.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.7.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 6.2.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.26.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.19.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.12.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 5.5.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.28.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.21.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.14.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 4.7.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.31.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.23.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.15.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.8.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 3.3.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.24.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.17.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.10.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 2.1.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.27.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.18.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.12.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 1.6.02 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.30.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.23.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 06.29.01 -RHIZOME DIGEST: 12.2.00 |
