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.

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +