Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Alan Sondheim]

Hi, For some reason I didn't see the last - and I agree totally with 
everything, and thank you.


Best, Alan


On Sat, 12 Jun 2021, Lichty, Patrick M wrote:


Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2021 20:06:30 -0500
From: "Lichty, Patrick M" 
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity

To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity

Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a
fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland


So say me all.
Yes, we need this place, we need you.

 

From: NetBehaviour  on behalf
of Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour 
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity

Date: Saturday, June 12, 2021 at 11:12 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity

Cc: Ruth Catlow 
Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a
fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

 

Hi  Alan

 

Did you read this bit?

 

"If we can agree that we (all subscribers) collectively own this place, and
are willing to reflect on this occasionally - that's more than enough for
me. We can stay with furtherfield legacy infrastructure and near-zero
moderation by Marc and me for now (if that suits everyone)."

 

I was asking for responses to a proposal. I see your point about allowing
people to go undeclared - I think it's a good one. 

 

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 3:52 PM Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour
 wrote:

  Hi Ruth,

 

I probably stand alone here. Occupy was many things, wasn't that well
organized, I was there several times. There was always a drum circle
on the outskirts that interrupted flow. There were outlying groups and
meetings that weren't on the main site. It was chaotic. It was bottom
up.

 

I don't like the suggestion below. First, I'm on a number of lists; on
most of them I don't post, but I learn. This is a tradition all the
way back. There are lists people have been silent on because they've
infiltrated right-wing or fascist organizations. There are people on
lists who don't want to be counted or accounted for, for many reasons.
Your suggestion seems like a forced enrollment: come forward, tell
everyone who you are, or you're gone. Another way to look at that:
It's a privilege to be on this list and you must actively participate
or you're gone. Or it's your duty as a member of this list to
participate or you're gone. Or if you're shy and just interested in
reading or possibly backchanneling only, you're gone.

 

This literally has me in tears. For me, again, lists have had the
advantage of the commons. But this commons then has a different
purpose, and if you don't fit in, leave. Then it's not a commons, is
it? Or are you talking about a commons where people must announce
their presence or be gone? You say "This revolved around efforts to
create open access" - but does this mean that you _must_ access
publicly and make your presence known?

 

Every list I'm on, by the way, is advertising-free; people might
announce they have a harmonica for sale (harmonica list) or a new book
has come out (wryting-l) or they're showing somewhere (Netbehaviour),
but they're not advertisement-based of course. People announce from
within the list, not to it.

 

We have to "know who is in the woods"? In England, perhaps land and
parkland is managed differently than in the U.S. You have to sign in
at National Parks, but just once - in fact that's like a subscription
- but you don't need to announce who you are on any basis to everyone
else. In state parks, you just go in, Much as this country is horrific
and lawless and armed to the teeth, we feel comfortable going to parks
(except for the tics).

 

I honestly don't feel comfortable on this list, and apologies for not
being more helpful. I'll continue posting daily, you'll do what you
want to do; the very performative discussion of unsubscribe is a
signifier of power. I am so tired of, so worn out, by promulgations of
power. (Yes, I know, power is everywhere, etc. But there are degrees
and there are safe spaces, at least for now.)

 

Alan

 

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 10:06 AM Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour
 wrote:

  Dear everyone,


  Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my
  niggles with the list. I now have a much better sense of
  what its value is to some of us at the fireside and a few
  of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly
  enjoying the recent exchanges!

  I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally
  resonant because I lived for a year in Penryn unaware of
  the history of the Ordinalia there. I find the format of
  passion plays - "acts" of faith "performed" by people in
  the places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks for that
  Adam!


Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The
revolutionary impulse of the early media art initiatives that
interested me was tied up with infrastructural critique and a
desire to create a new art context 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Lichty, Patrick M]

So say me all.
Yes, we need this place, we need you.

 

From: NetBehaviour  on behalf of 
Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour 
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity 

Date: Saturday, June 12, 2021 at 11:12 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity 

Cc: Ruth Catlow 
Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a 
fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

 

Hi  Alan

 

Did you read this bit?

 

"If we can agree that we (all subscribers) collectively own this place, and are 
willing to reflect on this occasionally - that's more than enough for me. We 
can stay with furtherfield legacy infrastructure and near-zero moderation by 
Marc and me for now (if that suits everyone)."

 

I was asking for responses to a proposal. I see your point about allowing 
people to go undeclared - I think it's a good one. 

 

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 3:52 PM Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour 
 wrote:

Hi Ruth,

 

I probably stand alone here. Occupy was many things, wasn't that well 
organized, I was there several times. There was always a drum circle on the 
outskirts that interrupted flow. There were outlying groups and meetings that 
weren't on the main site. It was chaotic. It was bottom up.

 

I don't like the suggestion below. First, I'm on a number of lists; on most of 
them I don't post, but I learn. This is a tradition all the way back. There are 
lists people have been silent on because they've infiltrated right-wing or 
fascist organizations. There are people on lists who don't want to be counted 
or accounted for, for many reasons. Your suggestion seems like a forced 
enrollment: come forward, tell everyone who you are, or you're gone. Another 
way to look at that: It's a privilege to be on this list and you must actively 
participate or you're gone. Or it's your duty as a member of this list to 
participate or you're gone. Or if you're shy and just interested in reading or 
possibly backchanneling only, you're gone.

 

This literally has me in tears. For me, again, lists have had the advantage of 
the commons. But this commons then has a different purpose, and if you don't 
fit in, leave. Then it's not a commons, is it? Or are you talking about a 
commons where people must announce their presence or be gone? You say "This 
revolved around efforts to create open access" - but does this mean that you 
_must_ access publicly and make your presence known? 

 

Every list I'm on, by the way, is advertising-free; people might announce they 
have a harmonica for sale (harmonica list) or a new book has come out 
(wryting-l) or they're showing somewhere (Netbehaviour), but they're not 
advertisement-based of course. People announce from within the list, not to it.

 

We have to "know who is in the woods"? In England, perhaps land and parkland is 
managed differently than in the U.S. You have to sign in at National Parks, but 
just once - in fact that's like a subscription - but you don't need to announce 
who you are on any basis to everyone else. In state parks, you just go in, Much 
as this country is horrific and lawless and armed to the teeth, we feel 
comfortable going to parks (except for the tics).

 

I honestly don't feel comfortable on this list, and apologies for not being 
more helpful. I'll continue posting daily, you'll do what you want to do; the 
very performative discussion of unsubscribe is a signifier of power. I am so 
tired of, so worn out, by promulgations of power. (Yes, I know, power is 
everywhere, etc. But there are degrees and there are safe spaces, at least for 
now.)

 

Alan

 

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 10:06 AM Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour 
 wrote:

Dear everyone,


Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the list. 
I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at the 
fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly 
enjoying the recent exchanges!

I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant because I 
lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the Ordinalia there. I 
find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith "performed" by people in the 
places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks for that Adam!


Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary impulse of 
the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up with 
infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context together. 
This revolved around efforts to create open access, and co-ownership of the 
media and platforms we needed for collaboration. Bringing together FLOSS and 
Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in this area Constant 
https://constantvzw.org/ for example. 


While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an analogy for 
this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's central commitment was 
to participatory democracy. The location of occupations were chosen 

[NetBehaviour] happening yesterday -

[Alan Sondheim]

happening yesterday -

http://www.alansondheim.org/slimemould.jpg

At the Doctor's yesterday for x-ray and bloodwork and dealing
with the strange falling-asleep-muscle-sensation in my left arm
that spread to my hand then up to my left shoulder then down my
left side to my left leg and then down my left leg and it was
difficult to stand and etc. and had a long discussion with the
doctor who had never heard of these symptoms, the cycle would
disappear and then return a while later, left shoulder left
wrist left arm left hand left side upper leg lower leg throb
throb as if the organs fell asleep and then going away and then
beginning again. so the bloodwork still waiting and the xray
things somewhat fine. So then I dictated below and we went out
and found a jumping spider we hadn't seen before and a Ozyptila
americana crab spider and a beautiful lynx spider and a live
scrambled egg slime which was amazing and a desiccated scrambled
egg slime and so the fauna were alive and healthy around the
office building which was near a highway back to Providence. So
still trying to figure out what happened, those events, and
right now nothing today at all but the usual being and nothing,
being and existence, being and nothingness, still thrown off and
worried what happens if it happens again and my left side no
longer functions. Waiting for the lab results and word from the
doctor.

and while at the medical center -

Wow when is this will pick up over there 21 BMW 330i xDrive
sedan for 4:39 per month what's worse but something's happening
over there it doesn't make any sense to me we're stuck in this
doctor's office and there's no place to even put up. Down so I
had chest x-rays and then now we're here so I can talk about the
Dizzy spell that I had yesterday several dizzy spells I've
started in my hand and I'll started in my arm and then moved
down to my hand I'm back up to my arm so that the arm forearm
and hand were buzzing and then move down my leg and the entire
leg was also going numb hand don't really know what was causing
that which is why we're at the doctor's office but there's ads
now for Etsy and things like that that are driving me crazy cuz
we're here and I'm getting a headache that's bordering on
migraine but I noticed it's spelled s a correct but it Miss his
other stuff in their culture what it's missing here although I
really don't want to buy a BMW I'd rather die that might
actually happen there is a animated cockroach I was just killed
or just disgusting I'll get back to this in a minute or two. So
if I could kick in an extra thousand dollars it would be a
Tuesday do you have anything to say it'll just had to it don't
have anything to say I can't take the phone away I can't take
the phone away if you don't take the phone away Dada Dada Dada
Dada Dada


(apologies to everyone for my weird mood)

___

___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Re: [NetBehaviour] Eat your place in space

[Paul Hertz via NetBehaviour]

Thanks, Max, for your observations and speculations. I'm writing on a
phone, so I'll be brief.

The pattern in my signature is called a Latin Square. It's used in
agricultural test plots, for example, in more complex versions. It's also
behind the pattern on the cake, though I hadn't made the connection until
your reply reminded me.

I created a game with homemade punchcards to produce thousands of
variations on the pattern on the cake. As part of the installation a local
theater group helped me to create a participatory wall design. Visitors to
the gallery strung a collection of colored beads on a string. The order of
the beads determined a pattern. I drew the outlines of the pattern on paper
mounted on the wall. The performers colored them in, following a set of
rules.

My photo exceeded the megabyte limits of the list, which is why it was
forwarded by a moderator (thank you!). But I do think that some modest use
of media in posts could be interesting. Right now people use links.

cheers,

Paul


On Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 1:30 PM Max Herman via NetBehaviour <
netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:

>
> Hi Paul,
>
> Such an interesting post and image, thank you!
>
> In your signature, I see a kind of A-B-B'-A' or "chiasmus" pattern, which
> I learned about just last year:
>
> (*,+,#,=)(#,=,*,+)(=,#,+,*)(+,*,=,#)
>
> asterisk, plus, number, equals
> number, equals, asterisk, plus
> equals, number, plus, asterisk
> plus, asterisk, equals, number
>
> or:
>
> 1-2-3-4
> 3-4-1-2
> 4-3-2-1
> 2-1-4-3
>
> I'm not especially knowledgeable about such permutations, maybe they are
> standard in some context?  But recursive loop is what I associate it with
> and this applies to lots of settings -- literature, geometry, knots, really
> very many contexts.  In the natural world helical and rotation patterns
> seems to resemble it in a sense, like the vines populating in yards this
> time of year in my climate zone.
>
> The floor pattern you mention is also super interesting.  The geometry
> itself in your photo is very unique and striking, how it looks kind of like
> a labyrinth pattern but it has lots of associations like a diagram, path,
> even a story perhaps but also a place.  So many of the places people
> mention lately, like ancient towns, have this story-path mix.  I was
> reminded of the floors of the Duomo in Florence which I visited in 2019 for
> the first time.  The floors are really interesting and geometrical, and
> with the giant clock in the Duomo caused me to wonder if the whole
> structure is kind of about time in a way.  The way one walks over, through,
> and within the geometry of the floors is very interesting.  They also look
> very modern, so I wonder if I'm misconstruing them as part of the Duomo --
> were they added in the 1800's?  I assume not, and even the exterior of the
> Duomo looks so oddly modern in its patterns, but I could be wrong.
>
> I haven't done any kind of food art that I can recall but of course it's
> very interesting and has millennia of parallels.  (Actually, in the book I
> just finished about Leonardo I included a little vignette about eating a
> wild grape I found during a walk by the river and it was one of my favorite
> parts of the book -- and the walk.)
>
> The social, community aspect of the great photo you include (which I
> didn't know was possible on list?) is very palpable.  It really extends the
> geometric pattern to another sphere so to speak, the people who
> participated and all their perceptions before, during, and after the event.
>
> It makes me wonder in what ways all art is generative art so to speak.
> I'm sure this has been said before though.
>
> I was thinking this morning about Dante for a book I'm trying about his
> relationship to Leonardo, a book prompted by a book about Leonardo that was
> absolutely prompted by my visit to Florence and the Duomo in spring 2019
> and the semi-coeval pandemic that followed shortly after.  Dante called his
> book just *Comedia*, the old spelling of commedia, which means just
> "comedy" and in Dante's era meant, from what I can gather, "story" of the
> sort that was about ordinary life and did not end in tragedy.  I had been
> thinking of someone's use of "convivial" to describe the list, a term that
> reminded me of Dante's pre-*Comedia *book *Convivio *(Banquet) which is
> about people sharing knowledge as they share food.  Dante outlines a lot of
> his scientific ideas in the *Convivio *and I'm trying to understand them
> a bit; he also outlines a kind of philosophy of art, imagination,
> psychology, poetry, painting, and so forth.
>
> For whatever reason I got to associating the names *Comedia *and
> *Convivio*, and it got me wondering if comedy relates at all to "eating
> together," i.e. comestible, etc.  I don't see that in the etymology site I
> use, but "komos" meant festival I guess which might have been associated
> with eating.  It's terribly unrigorous, this way of word-associating, and
> of course 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[James via NetBehaviour]

On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 15:05, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:

>
> Finally, I would be curious to hear your feelings about this proposal for
> list renewal.
> ===
>
> Over a 1 month period starting xxx
> We invite all subscribers to do one of 3 things
>
> 1. Make a post on any topic or responding to anyone else's post
> 2. Send an email with "Happy Lurker" in the subject header
> 3. Do nothing.
>
> At the end of this time, moderators could
> 1. gather a list of everyone who posted
> 2. unsubscribe everyone else.
>
> In this way we will know who we are, we will be able to see ourselves
> collectively and know who is in the woods.
>
> This is something we can do intermittently.
> 
> If you all love, hate or have alternative suggestions to this idea I'd
> love to know.
>
>
Hi Ruth,

The invitation to post on any topic and/or respond to another post is a
good one to open up discussion to broader topics.

When I was more active on here I always took "networked distributed
creativity" as something allowing me to post, but deliberately reading it
as 'network distributed' rather than 'networked & distributed' - I'm quite
useless at networking be it technologically, or socially and professionally.

Creativity was to me always the thread weaving through it all - but I
manage to see that thread pretty much in all aspects of my life however
tenuously connected to the arts that may be - which is something I'm
interested in posting about.

Cheers
James.
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Ana Valdés via NetBehaviour]

When I was younger and the Net was young as well and we used Telnet to open
our mail and slow modems it was a war. An European war. Not a tribal war in
far Africa or in the Middle East but it contained all same elements
barbaric killings mass graves we are still opening (Tuzla, Srebrenica),
insane hatred of your neighbours, etc.
The only allowed to the besieged Sarajevo was UN trucks loaded with
medicine and foods. A French group called itself “Modems sans Frontieres”
(Modems without borders) and successful smuggled in the city several models
and some old computers.
The modems run trough a slow connection in Austria in Vienna since the
Serbs had cut away all the cables and infrastructure in Bosnia.
Through several days maybe one week or ten days everyone living in Sarajevo
was able to post to their relatives and friends abroad it was a kind of
bottles on the sea since nobody knew people email and at that time few ppl
used email abs had personal addresses.
Some of their messages was of this kind: “Dear  Dejan grandmother died in
the last shelling of our village. Pray for her she loves you so much” “Dear
Ali we hope you managed to flee the killing in Srebrenica we hear horrible
things” “Dear Zulma we hope you are coping well with things we live most on
our cellar since the shellings are random and the snipers kill everyone
daring to go openly to the town. We don’t have so much food. We hope see
you soon when this is over”.

It was touching and warm hear/read all those disembodied voices.
For me this list and all others I am on reminds me on those anonymous and
collective agora where all voices are heard.

Thinking about Bachtins superb analys about how our society denies the
right to speak and try to kidnap the discourse making it hegemonic. We need
go back to the polyphonic society Bachtin wrote about.

Ana

On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 13:31, nathaniel stern via NetBehaviour <
netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:

> Happy Lurker agrees.
>
> nathaniel stern
> http://nathanielstern.com
>
> On Jun 12, 2021, at 9:03 AM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
> netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
>
> Dear everyone,
>
> Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the
> list. I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at
> the fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly
> enjoying the recent exchanges!
>
> I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant
> because I lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the
> Ordinalia there. I find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith
> "performed" by people in the places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks
> for that Adam!
>
> Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary impulse
> of the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up with
> infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context together.
> This revolved around efforts to create open access, and co-ownership of the
> media and platforms we needed for collaboration. Bringing together FLOSS
> and Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in this area Constant
> https://constantvzw.org/ for example.
>
> While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an
> analogy for this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's
> central commitment was to participatory democracy. The location of
> occupations were chosen for their symbolic significance to state-corporate
> capitalism, right? I guess we could think of this list as a prefigurative
> community resisting corporate platforms (I share everyone's love of this as
> an advertising-free space). But I detect less interest among this group in
> the question of how bottom-up decisions should be made to ensure fair
> distribution of power, and how that might in turn lead to the overthrow of
> capitalism. Occupy activists developed social technologies (some digital
> platforms, some gestures and techniques for use in large groups of people
> gathered physically) to make ALL the decisions together about all the
> things - from collective vision to organising waste-disposal. It's more
> emergent here.
>
> If we can agree that Commons are "shared cultural or material resources
> managed by communities for individual and collective benefit" then maybe
> this is what we have been working out here over the last couple of weeks
> and Netbehaviour is a kind of commons. If we can agree that we (all
> subscribers) collectively own this place, and are willing to reflect on
> this occasionally - that's more than enough for me. We can stay with
> furtherfield legacy infrastructure and near-zero moderation by Marc and me
> for now (if that suits everyone).
>
> Finally, I would be curious to hear your feelings about this proposal for
> list renewal.
> ===
>
> Over a 1 month period starting xxx
> We invite all subscribers to do one of 3 things
>
> 1. Make a post on any topic or 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Eat your place in space

[Max Herman via NetBehaviour]

Hi Paul,

Such an interesting post and image, thank you!

In your signature, I see a kind of A-B-B'-A' or "chiasmus" pattern, which I 
learned about just last year:

(*,+,#,=)(#,=,*,+)(=,#,+,*)(+,*,=,#)

asterisk, plus, number, equals
number, equals, asterisk, plus
equals, number, plus, asterisk
plus, asterisk, equals, number

or:

1-2-3-4
3-4-1-2
4-3-2-1
2-1-4-3

I'm not especially knowledgeable about such permutations, maybe they are 
standard in some context?  But recursive loop is what I associate it with and 
this applies to lots of settings -- literature, geometry, knots, really very 
many contexts.  In the natural world helical and rotation patterns seems to 
resemble it in a sense, like the vines populating in yards this time of year in 
my climate zone.

The floor pattern you mention is also super interesting.  The geometry itself 
in your photo is very unique and striking, how it looks kind of like a 
labyrinth pattern but it has lots of associations like a diagram, path, even a 
story perhaps but also a place.  So many of the places people mention lately, 
like ancient towns, have this story-path mix.  I was reminded of the floors of 
the Duomo in Florence which I visited in 2019 for the first time.  The floors 
are really interesting and geometrical, and with the giant clock in the Duomo 
caused me to wonder if the whole structure is kind of about time in a way.  The 
way one walks over, through, and within the geometry of the floors is very 
interesting.  They also look very modern, so I wonder if I'm misconstruing them 
as part of the Duomo -- were they added in the 1800's?  I assume not, and even 
the exterior of the Duomo looks so oddly modern in its patterns, but I could be 
wrong.

I haven't done any kind of food art that I can recall but of course it's very 
interesting and has millennia of parallels.  (Actually, in the book I just 
finished about Leonardo I included a little vignette about eating a wild grape 
I found during a walk by the river and it was one of my favorite parts of the 
book -- and the walk.)

The social, community aspect of the great photo you include (which I didn't 
know was possible on list?) is very palpable.  It really extends the geometric 
pattern to another sphere so to speak, the people who participated and all 
their perceptions before, during, and after the event.

It makes me wonder in what ways all art is generative art so to speak.  I'm 
sure this has been said before though.

I was thinking this morning about Dante for a book I'm trying about his 
relationship to Leonardo, a book prompted by a book about Leonardo that was 
absolutely prompted by my visit to Florence and the Duomo in spring 2019 and 
the semi-coeval pandemic that followed shortly after.  Dante called his book 
just Comedia, the old spelling of commedia, which means just "comedy" and in 
Dante's era meant, from what I can gather, "story" of the sort that was about 
ordinary life and did not end in tragedy.  I had been thinking of someone's use 
of "convivial" to describe the list, a term that reminded me of Dante's 
pre-Comedia book Convivio (Banquet) which is about people sharing knowledge as 
they share food.  Dante outlines a lot of his scientific ideas in the Convivio 
and I'm trying to understand them a bit; he also outlines a kind of philosophy 
of art, imagination, psychology, poetry, painting, and so forth.

For whatever reason I got to associating the names Comedia and Convivio, and it 
got me wondering if comedy relates at all to "eating together," i.e. 
comestible, etc.  I don't see that in the etymology site I use, but "komos" 
meant festival I guess which might have been associated with eating.  It's 
terribly unrigorous, this way of word-associating, and of course there may be 
zero valid connection between comedy and eating etymologically, but it had me 
thinking anyway.

Then I was reminded of Cattelan's Comedian from a year or two ago.  I don't 
know much about Cattelan, just what one reads in the papers so to speak, but I 
do know he created a golden toilet (which was in the media relating to a spat 
over loaning artwork to the previous president, and then again for being stolen 
I think) and a work in which he "sold" his gallerist.  So, kind of conceptual 
and performance art perhaps is a common thread.

In any case, the Comedian was written about at the time for being a work 
documented and sold using a digital certificate if I recall.  Again, not sure 
how or if this relates to the recent discussion here.  In trying to "decipher" 
the work, a task which is perhaps some core part of every art work, 
commentators mentioned that "bananas are comical because people slip on them 
and it is deemed funny."  I guess Cattelan had also used bananas in previous 
works.  Comedian was a banana taped to the wall, in three reproductions, so 
people kind of said "it's a joke on the art world."  Fair enough.  Then however 
I wondered if it could have been a kind of chiasmus, where 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[nathaniel stern via NetBehaviour]

Happy Lurker agrees.

nathaniel stern
http://nathanielstern.com

> On Jun 12, 2021, at 9:03 AM, Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dear everyone,
> 
> Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the 
> list. I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at 
> the fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly 
> enjoying the recent exchanges!
> 
> I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant because I 
> lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the Ordinalia there. I 
> find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith "performed" by people in 
> the places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks for that Adam!
> 
> Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary impulse of 
> the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up with 
> infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context together. 
> This revolved around efforts to create open access, and co-ownership of the 
> media and platforms we needed for collaboration. Bringing together FLOSS and 
> Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in this area Constant 
> https://constantvzw.org/  for example. 
> 
> While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an analogy 
> for this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's central 
> commitment was to participatory democracy. The location of occupations were 
> chosen for their symbolic significance to state-corporate capitalism, right? 
> I guess we could think of this list as a prefigurative community resisting 
> corporate platforms (I share everyone's love of this as an advertising-free 
> space). But I detect less interest among this group in the question of how 
> bottom-up decisions should be made to ensure fair distribution of power, and 
> how that might in turn lead to the overthrow of capitalism. Occupy activists 
> developed social technologies (some digital platforms, some gestures and 
> techniques for use in large groups of people gathered physically) to make ALL 
> the decisions together about all the things - from collective vision to 
> organising waste-disposal. It's more emergent here.
> 
> If we can agree that Commons are "shared cultural or material resources 
> managed by communities for individual and collective benefit" then maybe this 
> is what we have been working out here over the last couple of weeks and 
> Netbehaviour is a kind of commons. If we can agree that we (all subscribers) 
> collectively own this place, and are willing to reflect on this occasionally 
> - that's more than enough for me. We can stay with furtherfield legacy 
> infrastructure and near-zero moderation by Marc and me for now (if that suits 
> everyone).
> 
> Finally, I would be curious to hear your feelings about this proposal for 
> list renewal.
> ===
> 
> Over a 1 month period starting xxx
> We invite all subscribers to do one of 3 things
> 
> 1. Make a post on any topic or responding to anyone else's post
> 2. Send an email with "Happy Lurker" in the subject header
> 3. Do nothing.
> 
> At the end of this time, moderators could 
> 1. gather a list of everyone who posted
> 2. unsubscribe everyone else.
> 
> In this way we will know who we are, we will be able to see ourselves 
> collectively and know who is in the woods.
> 
> This is something we can do intermittently.
> 
> If you all love, hate or have alternative suggestions to this idea I'd love 
> to know.
>  
> warmly
> Ruth
> 
> -- 
> Ruth Catlow 
> she/her
> Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised Arts Lab
> +44 (0) 77370 02879 
> 
> *I will only agree to speak at events that are racially and gender balanced. 
> 
> **sending thanks 
> 
>  in advance
> 
> Furtherfield disrupts and democratises art and technology through 
> exhibitions, labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking. 
> furtherfield.org 
> 
> DECAL Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0 technologies 
> research hub 
> for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now. 
> decal.is 
> 
> Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee 
> Registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205. 
> Registered business address: Carbon Accountancy, 80-83 Long Lane, London, 
> EC1A 9ET.
> 
> 
> ___
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
> https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

___
NetBehaviour mailing list

Re: [NetBehaviour] offlist -- Re: Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Max Herman via NetBehaviour]

So sorry for posting this to all!  Oh well, no harm no foul I hope!  Arg.


From: NetBehaviour  on behalf of 
Max Herman via NetBehaviour 
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2021 11:17 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity 

Cc: Max Herman 
Subject: [NetBehaviour] offlist -- Re: Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a 
commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland


Hi Ruth,

I really appreciate your dedication and clarity in helping the list be its 
best.  Many years ago I briefly attempted to coordinate a list or two and it 
was terribly difficult, so what you have already achieved with Netbehaviour is 
quite significant.  The prospects for continuing, evolving, and developing the 
list in accordance with your vision -- because as chief organizer I consider 
you very much justified in leading with regards to vision -- are also excellent 
I think.

What you propose sounds like a good idea to me.  I'm less experienced with the 
list logistics of unsubscribing inactive participants, but it makes sense.  
Others may have reasons to leave inactive emails subscribed but I can't think 
of any, so I would certainly support the suggestion.

Your ask for each of us to consider ourselves co-proprietors of the list in at 
least some degree is very organic and wise -- we are, as participants, 
involved, and being aware of that or reminded when needed is highly 
appropriate.  I'll support your recommendations in this respect and if there is 
ever anything you wish to request of me individually -- to post less, consider 
topic choices, etc. -- please feel free to let me know either on or offlist.

All very best,

Max




From: NetBehaviour  on behalf of 
Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour 
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2021 9:03 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity 

Cc: Ruth Catlow 
Subject: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in 
the ruins in an ancient woodland

Dear everyone,

Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the list. 
I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at the 
fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly 
enjoying the recent exchanges!

I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant because I 
lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the Ordinalia there. I 
find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith "performed" by people in the 
places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks for that Adam!

Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary impulse of 
the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up with 
infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context together. 
This revolved around efforts to create open access, and co-ownership of the 
media and platforms we needed for collaboration. Bringing together FLOSS and 
Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in this area Constant 
https://constantvzw.org/ for example.

While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an analogy for 
this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's central commitment was 
to participatory democracy. The location of occupations were chosen for their 
symbolic significance to state-corporate capitalism, right? I guess we could 
think of this list as a prefigurative community resisting corporate platforms 
(I share everyone's love of this as an advertising-free space). But I detect 
less interest among this group in the question of how bottom-up decisions 
should be made to ensure fair distribution of power, and how that might in turn 
lead to the overthrow of capitalism. Occupy activists developed social 
technologies (some digital platforms, some gestures and techniques for use in 
large groups of people gathered physically) to make ALL the decisions together 
about all the things - from collective vision to organising waste-disposal. 
It's more emergent here.

If we can agree that Commons are "shared cultural or material resources managed 
by communities for individual and collective benefit" then maybe this is what 
we have been working out here over the last couple of weeks and Netbehaviour is 
a kind of commons. If we can agree that we (all subscribers) collectively own 
this place, and are willing to reflect on this occasionally - that's more than 
enough for me. We can stay with furtherfield legacy infrastructure and 
near-zero moderation by Marc and me for now (if that suits everyone).

Finally, I would be curious to hear your feelings about this proposal for list 
renewal.
===

Over a 1 month period starting xxx
We invite all subscribers to do one of 3 things

1. Make a post on any topic or responding to anyone else's post
2. Send an email with "Happy Lurker" in the subject header
3. Do nothing.

At the end of this time, moderators could
1. gather a list of everyone who posted
2. 

[NetBehaviour] offlist -- Re: Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Max Herman via NetBehaviour]

Hi Ruth,

I really appreciate your dedication and clarity in helping the list be its 
best.  Many years ago I briefly attempted to coordinate a list or two and it 
was terribly difficult, so what you have already achieved with Netbehaviour is 
quite significant.  The prospects for continuing, evolving, and developing the 
list in accordance with your vision -- because as chief organizer I consider 
you very much justified in leading with regards to vision -- are also excellent 
I think.

What you propose sounds like a good idea to me.  I'm less experienced with the 
list logistics of unsubscribing inactive participants, but it makes sense.  
Others may have reasons to leave inactive emails subscribed but I can't think 
of any, so I would certainly support the suggestion.

Your ask for each of us to consider ourselves co-proprietors of the list in at 
least some degree is very organic and wise -- we are, as participants, 
involved, and being aware of that or reminded when needed is highly 
appropriate.  I'll support your recommendations in this respect and if there is 
ever anything you wish to request of me individually -- to post less, consider 
topic choices, etc. -- please feel free to let me know either on or offlist.

All very best,

Max




From: NetBehaviour  on behalf of 
Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour 
Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2021 9:03 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity 

Cc: Ruth Catlow 
Subject: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in 
the ruins in an ancient woodland

Dear everyone,

Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the list. 
I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at the 
fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly 
enjoying the recent exchanges!

I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant because I 
lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the Ordinalia there. I 
find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith "performed" by people in the 
places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks for that Adam!

Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary impulse of 
the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up with 
infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context together. 
This revolved around efforts to create open access, and co-ownership of the 
media and platforms we needed for collaboration. Bringing together FLOSS and 
Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in this area Constant 
https://constantvzw.org/ for example.

While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an analogy for 
this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's central commitment was 
to participatory democracy. The location of occupations were chosen for their 
symbolic significance to state-corporate capitalism, right? I guess we could 
think of this list as a prefigurative community resisting corporate platforms 
(I share everyone's love of this as an advertising-free space). But I detect 
less interest among this group in the question of how bottom-up decisions 
should be made to ensure fair distribution of power, and how that might in turn 
lead to the overthrow of capitalism. Occupy activists developed social 
technologies (some digital platforms, some gestures and techniques for use in 
large groups of people gathered physically) to make ALL the decisions together 
about all the things - from collective vision to organising waste-disposal. 
It's more emergent here.

If we can agree that Commons are "shared cultural or material resources managed 
by communities for individual and collective benefit" then maybe this is what 
we have been working out here over the last couple of weeks and Netbehaviour is 
a kind of commons. If we can agree that we (all subscribers) collectively own 
this place, and are willing to reflect on this occasionally - that's more than 
enough for me. We can stay with furtherfield legacy infrastructure and 
near-zero moderation by Marc and me for now (if that suits everyone).

Finally, I would be curious to hear your feelings about this proposal for list 
renewal.
===

Over a 1 month period starting xxx
We invite all subscribers to do one of 3 things

1. Make a post on any topic or responding to anyone else's post
2. Send an email with "Happy Lurker" in the subject header
3. Do nothing.

At the end of this time, moderators could
1. gather a list of everyone who posted
2. unsubscribe everyone else.

In this way we will know who we are, we will be able to see ourselves 
collectively and know who is in the woods.

This is something we can do intermittently.

If you all love, hate or have alternative suggestions to this idea I'd love to 
know.

warmly
Ruth

--
Ruth Catlow
she/her
Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised Arts Lab
+44 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour]

Hi  Alan

Did you read this bit?

"If we can agree that we (all subscribers) collectively own this place, and
are willing to reflect on this occasionally - that's more than enough for
me. We can stay with furtherfield legacy infrastructure and near-zero
moderation by Marc and me for now (if that suits everyone)."

I was asking for responses to a proposal. I see your point about allowing
people to go undeclared - I think it's a good one.





On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 3:52 PM Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour <
netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:

> Hi Ruth,
>
> I probably stand alone here. Occupy was many things, wasn't that well
> organized, I was there several times. There was always a drum circle on the
> outskirts that interrupted flow. There were outlying groups and meetings
> that weren't on the main site. It was chaotic. It was bottom up.
>
> I don't like the suggestion below. First, I'm on a number of lists; on
> most of them I don't post, but I learn. This is a tradition all the way
> back. There are lists people have been silent on because they've
> infiltrated right-wing or fascist organizations. There are people on lists
> who don't want to be counted or accounted for, for many reasons. Your
> suggestion seems like a forced enrollment: come forward, tell everyone who
> you are, or you're gone. Another way to look at that: It's a privilege to
> be on this list and you must actively participate or you're gone. Or it's
> your duty as a member of this list to participate or you're gone. Or if
> you're shy and just interested in reading or possibly backchanneling only,
> you're gone.
>
> This literally has me in tears. For me, again, lists have had the
> advantage of the commons. But this commons then has a different purpose,
> and if you don't fit in, leave. Then it's not a commons, is it? Or are you
> talking about a commons where people must announce their presence or be
> gone? You say "This revolved around efforts to create open access" - but
> does this mean that you _must_ access publicly and make your presence
> known?
>
> Every list I'm on, by the way, is advertising-free; people might announce
> they have a harmonica for sale (harmonica list) or a new book has come out
> (wryting-l) or they're showing somewhere (Netbehaviour), but they're not
> advertisement-based of course. People announce from within the list, not to
> it.
>
> We have to "know who is in the woods"? In England, perhaps land and
> parkland is managed differently than in the U.S. You have to sign in at
> National Parks, but just once - in fact that's like a subscription - but
> you don't need to announce who you are on any basis to everyone else. In
> state parks, you just go in, Much as this country is horrific and lawless
> and armed to the teeth, we feel comfortable going to parks (except for the
> tics).
>
> I honestly don't feel comfortable on this list, and apologies for not
> being more helpful. I'll continue posting daily, you'll do what you want to
> do; the very performative discussion of unsubscribe is a signifier of
> power. I am so tired of, so worn out, by promulgations of power. (Yes, I
> know, power is everywhere, etc. But there are degrees and there are safe
> spaces, at least for now.)
>
> Alan
>
> On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 10:06 AM Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
> netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear everyone,
>>
>> Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the
>> list. I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at
>> the fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly
>> enjoying the recent exchanges!
>>
>> I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant
>> because I lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the
>> Ordinalia there. I find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith
>> "performed" by people in the places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks
>> for that Adam!
>>
>> Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary
>> impulse of the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up
>> with infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context
>> together. This revolved around efforts to create open access, and
>> co-ownership of the media and platforms we needed for collaboration.
>> Bringing together FLOSS and Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in
>> this area Constant https://constantvzw.org/ for example.
>>
>> While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an
>> analogy for this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's
>> central commitment was to participatory democracy. The location of
>> occupations were chosen for their symbolic significance to state-corporate
>> capitalism, right? I guess we could think of this list as a prefigurative
>> community resisting corporate platforms (I share everyone's love of this as
>> an advertising-free space). But I detect less interest among this 

Re: [NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour]

Hi Ruth,

I probably stand alone here. Occupy was many things, wasn't that well
organized, I was there several times. There was always a drum circle on the
outskirts that interrupted flow. There were outlying groups and meetings
that weren't on the main site. It was chaotic. It was bottom up.

I don't like the suggestion below. First, I'm on a number of lists; on most
of them I don't post, but I learn. This is a tradition all the way back.
There are lists people have been silent on because they've infiltrated
right-wing or fascist organizations. There are people on lists who don't
want to be counted or accounted for, for many reasons. Your suggestion
seems like a forced enrollment: come forward, tell everyone who you are, or
you're gone. Another way to look at that: It's a privilege to be on this
list and you must actively participate or you're gone. Or it's your duty as
a member of this list to participate or you're gone. Or if you're shy and
just interested in reading or possibly backchanneling only, you're gone.

This literally has me in tears. For me, again, lists have had the advantage
of the commons. But this commons then has a different purpose, and if you
don't fit in, leave. Then it's not a commons, is it? Or are you talking
about a commons where people must announce their presence or be gone? You
say "This revolved around efforts to create open access" - but does this
mean that you _must_ access publicly and make your presence known?

Every list I'm on, by the way, is advertising-free; people might announce
they have a harmonica for sale (harmonica list) or a new book has come out
(wryting-l) or they're showing somewhere (Netbehaviour), but they're not
advertisement-based of course. People announce from within the list, not to
it.

We have to "know who is in the woods"? In England, perhaps land and
parkland is managed differently than in the U.S. You have to sign in at
National Parks, but just once - in fact that's like a subscription - but
you don't need to announce who you are on any basis to everyone else. In
state parks, you just go in, Much as this country is horrific and lawless
and armed to the teeth, we feel comfortable going to parks (except for the
tics).

I honestly don't feel comfortable on this list, and apologies for not being
more helpful. I'll continue posting daily, you'll do what you want to do;
the very performative discussion of unsubscribe is a signifier of power. I
am so tired of, so worn out, by promulgations of power. (Yes, I know, power
is everywhere, etc. But there are degrees and there are safe spaces, at
least for now.)

Alan

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 10:06 AM Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <
netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org> wrote:

> Dear everyone,
>
> Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the
> list. I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at
> the fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly
> enjoying the recent exchanges!
>
> I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant
> because I lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the
> Ordinalia there. I find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith
> "performed" by people in the places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks
> for that Adam!
>
> Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary impulse
> of the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up with
> infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context together.
> This revolved around efforts to create open access, and co-ownership of the
> media and platforms we needed for collaboration. Bringing together FLOSS
> and Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in this area Constant
> https://constantvzw.org/ for example.
>
> While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an
> analogy for this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's
> central commitment was to participatory democracy. The location of
> occupations were chosen for their symbolic significance to state-corporate
> capitalism, right? I guess we could think of this list as a prefigurative
> community resisting corporate platforms (I share everyone's love of this as
> an advertising-free space). But I detect less interest among this group in
> the question of how bottom-up decisions should be made to ensure fair
> distribution of power, and how that might in turn lead to the overthrow of
> capitalism. Occupy activists developed social technologies (some digital
> platforms, some gestures and techniques for use in large groups of people
> gathered physically) to make ALL the decisions together about all the
> things - from collective vision to organising waste-disposal. It's more
> emergent here.
>
> If we can agree that Commons are "shared cultural or material resources
> managed by communities for individual and collective benefit" then maybe
> this is what we have been working out here over the last 

[NetBehaviour] Netbehaviour renewal - Occupy? a commons? by a fire, in the ruins in an ancient woodland

[Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour]

Dear everyone,

Thanks so much for helping me to work through some of my niggles with the
list. I now have a much better sense of what its value is to some of us at
the fireside and a few of the people from the woods. I've also been greatly
enjoying the recent exchanges!

I also found Adam's email beautiful. Especially personally resonant because
I lived for a year in Penryn unaware of the history of the Ordinalia there.
I find the format of passion plays - "acts" of faith "performed" by people
in the places where they belong - enthralling.Thanks for that Adam!

Annie's response was also really helpful for me. The revolutionary impulse
of the early media art initiatives that interested me was tied up with
infrastructural critique and a desire to create a new art context together.
This revolved around efforts to create open access, and co-ownership of the
media and platforms we needed for collaboration. Bringing together FLOSS
and Art. There is still a lot of inspiring work in this area Constant
https://constantvzw.org/ for example.

While I "get" the Occupy vibe here, it doesn't feel so useful as an analogy
for this list/community as it stands at the moment. Occupy's central
commitment was to participatory democracy. The location of occupations were
chosen for their symbolic significance to state-corporate capitalism,
right? I guess we could think of this list as a prefigurative community
resisting corporate platforms (I share everyone's love of this as an
advertising-free space). But I detect less interest among this group in the
question of how bottom-up decisions should be made to ensure fair
distribution of power, and how that might in turn lead to the overthrow of
capitalism. Occupy activists developed social technologies (some digital
platforms, some gestures and techniques for use in large groups of people
gathered physically) to make ALL the decisions together about all the
things - from collective vision to organising waste-disposal. It's more
emergent here.

If we can agree that Commons are "shared cultural or material resources
managed by communities for individual and collective benefit" then maybe
this is what we have been working out here over the last couple of weeks
and Netbehaviour is a kind of commons. If we can agree that we (all
subscribers) collectively own this place, and are willing to reflect on
this occasionally - that's more than enough for me. We can stay with
furtherfield legacy infrastructure and near-zero moderation by Marc and me
for now (if that suits everyone).

Finally, I would be curious to hear your feelings about this proposal for
list renewal.
===

Over a 1 month period starting xxx
We invite all subscribers to do one of 3 things

1. Make a post on any topic or responding to anyone else's post
2. Send an email with "Happy Lurker" in the subject header
3. Do nothing.

At the end of this time, moderators could
1. gather a list of everyone who posted
2. unsubscribe everyone else.

In this way we will know who we are, we will be able to see ourselves
collectively and know who is in the woods.

This is something we can do intermittently.

If you all love, hate or have alternative suggestions to this idea I'd love
to know.

warmly
Ruth

-- 
Ruth Catlow
she/her
Co-founder & Artistic director of Furtherfield & DECAL Decentralised Arts
Lab
+44 (0) 77370 02879

*I will only agree to speak at events that are racially and gender
balanced.

**sending thanks

in
advance

*Furtherfield *disrupts and democratises art and technology through
exhibitions,
labs & debate, for deep exploration, open tools & free thinking.
furtherfield.org 

*DECAL* Decentralised Arts Lab is an arts, blockchain & web 3.0 technologies
research hub

for fairer, more dynamic & connected cultural ecologies & economies now.

decal.is 

Furtherfield is a Not-for-Profit Company Limited by Guarantee

Registered in England and Wales under the Company No.7005205.

Registered business address: Carbon Accountancy, 80-83 Long Lane, London,
EC1A 9ET.
___
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour