I must say I totally agree with the reflections of Paul and others on the value of a mailing list. Paul, you'd be interested to know that nettime was originally a "text-filtering list" [ie, long texts] devoted to the "immanent critique of the networks." The latter has sometimes been carried out extremely well (a standout in memory, years ago, was the collectively generated critique of bitcoin for adopting the neoliberal / Hayekian theory of money).
Maybe you can do that on Mastodon. It's always worth trying. So I like the idea of maintaining the list while trying something new. I gather that the mods have been tired of floating this thing for so long - I guess after some 25 years at it for Ted and Felix, the thrill of maintaining an extraordinary forum wears off. We should figure out a way to relieve them of this task. Being mindful that the list has lasted so long because of judicious, but increasingly light, moderation. Best to all, Brian On Tue, Dec 6, 2022, 02:03 paul <p...@denknerd.org> wrote: > Hello all, > > This is my first time responding on nettime-l, after lurking for a > while (not that long, comparatively - i only discovered this > amazing list about a year or two ago). I always look forward to > reading the well-considered messages, and often humbling levels of > knowledge of literature, history, etc. that are shared here. > > Others have already made all the points i can think of, more > eloquently so, but i think there's value in adding one's voice, if > nothing else. I would be sad to see my favourite mailing list > scuppered. Decent, active mailing lists seem very few and far > between indeed, while email is basically my favourite medium for > online exchange (i admit my bias - i won't repeat the arguments > others have made in favour of email). > > To try and address some of the many valid questions i've seen: > > Ted, you mention nettime stagnating. I ask this in a naive way, > as a newcomer to the list (so forgive me if i should know), but > what is the aim of nettime, exactly? It seems plausible to me > that it might be achieving its aim (for argument's sake, "be a > forum for critical media discussion") quite well even while > stagnating as a medium. I ask because i'm quite suspicious of > arguments that boil down to change being needed for its own sake. > This reminds me of the ethos of contemporary tech companies that > seem to change (often for the worse) user interfaces, products, > entire product lines, etc. while optimising for their bottom line, > rather than the user's utility. > > I want to be explicit that i am definitely not accusing you or the > other mods of somehow doing something for your own benefit, and i > certainly don't feel entitled to this amazing service which is > likely volunteer run at considerable personal cost - i, much like > many others i'm sure, deeply appreciate this forum. I just want > to emphasise that as i see it, being a bastion of stability and > backwards-compatibility (and consume-as-you-wish) can be quite a > radical act in the contemporary online ecosphere. (just random > thoughts: can nettime be radical both initially, before such > online communities were popular, and now, when they often take > place on Web 2.0-type walled garden platforms, but for different > reasons, while doing the same thing?) > > Also, to Jon Lebkowsky's point, i often hear arguments similar in > shape to "my email inbox is a mess, i can't keep up, let's use > <platform X>". As someone who curates their email inflow quite > carefully, i respectfully want to ask whether switching to some > other platform would really help with that issue? I have no > difficulty imagining being in e.g. a number of Discord servers and > not keeping up with the influx of messages and profusion of > threads, either. > > I have rambled enough. I, too, would be happy to volunteer > financial support or perhaps my efforts if that's useful, for > maintaining the Mailman infrastructure. I think nettime-l is a > rare treasure on the modern internet, and while of course others > might find value in having their discussions on, say, Mastodon, > would it make sense for those who want to, join some other > instance, and not require the nettime moderators to divide their > efforts running two sets of infrastructure? There are many > Mastodon instances, but very few nettime-l's. > > All the best, and my sincere and unreserved thanks to those who > initiated, and now maintain nettime. Even if you decided to turn > nettime-l off tomorrow, i would still have learned and had my > intellectual life enriched. > > p. > > On 2022-11-30 at 13:30 -05, quoth Ted Byfield > <tedbyfi...@gmail.com>: > > Geoff — > > > > Thanks for this. I agree with the outlines of what you say, and > > with most of the detail too. Felix and Doma have their own > > perspectives, so this is just me. > > > > I'm not sure what you mean about a recurring argument, but > > that's not to suggest you're mistaken. As a mod, I probably see > > nettime through a more technical lens than most subscribers > > would, and that's no doubt shaped how I've talked about the list > > and its project. That said, I agree the problems aren't > > technical in nature, and neither would any 'solutions' be — if > > anyone's inclined to believe in 'solutions' (FWIW, I'm not). > > > > One example, which Felix touched on: the quasi-generational > > aspect of email, both relative (when someone ~adopted it) and > > absolute (how old/young you are). As we noted in the > > announcement, it's morphed from a pleasure into something more > > like a utility — in part *because* of its standardization, > > reliability, etc. Like a lot of nettimers, I've spent decades > > teaching, and have a fairly broad experience of students' > > attitudes to email have become more negative. Saying it's 'dead' > > was hyperbole, i.e, an exaggeration with a seed of truth. Chalk > > that up to the context: an invitation may say 'happy holidays' > > or whatever, but it's not intended as a diktat (though I always > > hear a bit of that ideological force too). > > > > To say that every discussion-oriented mailing list I'm on is > > graying would be a serious understatement. They might be > > fascinating, lively, provocative, solid, or whatever, but the > > retirement-home vibe is strong indeed. But in our case that's > > just one piece of a puzzle whose picture is very diffuse — with > > ~gender / identity issues, regional concentrations, received > > norms about relevance and style, etc, etc. I think many would > > agree the list is great *and* has problems — or, if you like, > > could be greater in new ways. > > > > It's plainly true that we're hopping on the fediverse bandwagon, > > so questioning the wisdom of that kind of precipitous action is, > > without question, wise. (It's also true, though less visible, > > that it's only the most recent move we've weighed.) But that > > implies another question: is 'doing nothing' — or at least > > following the same path wise? In the short term, sure, but in > > the longer term no, I think. Doing that would all but guarantee > > the list's historical weaknesses would only become more > > ingrained, and with that the list would become more and more > > insular. > > > > If we had announced we autocratically decided to shut down the > > list, your criticism would be spot-on, but we didn't — or at > > least not quite. We did say that maintaining both > > 'infrastructures' seems like it'd be too much for us, but > > whatever decisions will be made in that regard can and should be > > collective. That's an invitation. We don't know to what exactly, > > or to whom, or when, or how, or anything else. > > > > For me at least, that uncertainty was/is pretty much the essence > > of this ~move. It's a risk, but I think nettime's ~stagnation — > > not just as a list but as a larger project — is largely due to > > the fact that we haven't found ways to take new risks. > > > > Cheers, > > Ted > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission > # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, > # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets > # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l > # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org > # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:
