From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 1.6.1: in.stig][m][at][a][ed as objects_
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:46:19 +1000




::.this obsession with labels N d.finitions that m.brace our work N our 
s][h][elfs.
coming from the POV of a nic][lic][he.d "net.artist" i guess i try N span 
many labels, and have found myself doing so lately in order 2 survive 
[grants, competitions, etc].........but it is, s.sentially, crap. labels do 
nothing 2 further x.pressive development, & seem 2 primarily s][w][erve 2 
mark artists N wurk along a definitive, prosperity plane.......we b.come 
objects N objecti.f][r][ied in order to slot in the societal/memetic 
framework......

05:54 PM 11/5/2001
::its been obvious that for some time web/net/e./code poets [n.sert 
s.tab.lished label of yr choice here] r more accepted if they produce wurks 
that reflect the traditional kraftwurk idea...that is, create a finished, 
marketable, tangible target.......

::our methods of analysis go on to reflect this orientation, N therefore we 
don't discuss the fragment or the discard, we discuss _complete_ 
holistically d.termin][able][ed wurks. any @tempt 2 do otherwise is beyond 
the scope of this list's delineated function.





.           .    ....         .....
From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 1.7.2: Hellos & tone.ality_
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:46:40 +1000






::...& on this note i'd like 2 add my in.tro.][N.][duction 2 the list.

::i'm mez ][aka mary-anne breeze aka numerous avatarian-type-faces][. i'm a 
_netwurker_ who likes 2 x.plore & n.corporate autopoethical/fictionalised 
n][ew][uances in2 traditionally d.fined correspondence pathways [via 
"mezangelled" language iterations]  [among uber thangs].

now that's out. of. the. way........[i loathe intros, as they promote that 
s][heen][urface ill.usion of personality definition by 
reality-ego-di][convo][luted proxy....]..on2 the reason i crawled out of my 
wurdniche.......


::i c this _evolving world of creative net.production & the re-weaving of 
corresponding power-dynamics_  as n.nately reflected in the very x.tended 
avenues of potential communication n.hancement/alteration that the 
net][wurk][ offers, s.pecially in terms of the establishment of another 
email list based on a traditional n.et][hical][tique/ academic 
debate-&-banter-d.fined method of discourse.....i hope that this n.nitial 
gestation/dynamic definition period won't slowly crystallize in2 a regular 
theory-email-list-comm route without attempts 2 x.amine the dynamics & 
potentials of a space such as this.......of course, it has been made 
abundantly clear that this is the moderators list in terms of moderation & 
direction.......

....my hopes 4 the list is that a wurkable ][oscillating][middle-point can 
b found where the list won't descend in2 garbled spam-driven non-cogitative 
typology but also that it can resist predictable reiterative slippage in2 
rigid academia-disc][ursive][ourse mapping.....

..and on that note, its back 2 ][the net][wurk.......







From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 3.8: in _=_ness_
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:46:57 +1000



::in terms of the pre//loading screen, they ][seem 2][
remove so much of wot makes a wurk n.teresting in terms of the gaps &
n][ew][.uances of staggered data conveyancing.......pre.loads
per.pet][ty][uate the ill.usion that the output of this
medi][a][um-as-pol][fin][ished; that the object][iffy.cation][s we seek 2
produce x.ist i/on a st][reli][able absorption
plat][terra][form][ing][...........




From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 6.987900: x.tendibly_
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:47:17 +1000




::ah, the hub.                   d i f f e r e n c e   [n.sert perpetual loop]

n.deed, y r there? this _difference_ is telling........instead of operating 
via this divergent take, i c the net.work as a _whole_, operational in 
terms of infosharing & dispersal........

this difference, this reliance on the in box as a box, not as a 
][link][node........

HISTORIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????????????????

.........surely u jest here, histories????
history doesn't x.ist, it is a fiction @ best........


::i c it as _ratifiying_ the nature of mailing lists.......n][et][ature as 
d.fined by connexion, communicative points in an x.tendible net of flow & 
flux......do u want 2 x.clude those not so ego-n.trenched in this 
net.baggage? if _xXx_ is subbed to syndicate but not 2 _reader-list_, and 
info is not cross-posted due to x.clusionary individualisation via blanket 
withdrawal of crucial info due 2 justifications such as u yr espousing, do 
u c that _xXx_ is then x.cluded from x.posure 2 info _from which_ they can 
then choose 2 x.pose themselves 2?

[filters. r. yr|the. x.clusionists. friend.]


::i. offer. a different. view.

these numbers that u assume r being overwritten [due 2 
non-responsivity|lurking b.haviour etc], this community that is b.ing [in 
yr view] blanked out due 2 the nature of x.tended information x.posure is 
d.fined by wot x.actly? wot makes up the community here, in this net.worked 
area? is it repetition of dialogical conventions? participation via 
manifest post activity? access 2 information? access 2 communication via 
other entity participation? wot?


::it bothers me greatly that u'd offer these opinions & not firstly c that 
they r in fact _drenched with yr individualistic-ego driven spin_...as r my 
opinions....wot matters here 4 me is that this _community_ of mailing lists 
[in my case, network connectors] r being bandied around as cohesive 
structures in which individuals autonomously activate data _without_ any 
nuanced understanding of the mechanisms via which these communities 
act\interactive\x.ist.......

u need 2 x.plain the community function 2 me, within the confines of a 
mailing list forum.

[pre.tend - or ack.no.ledge- i. am. an. idiot.]






From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 9.0.1: segregate & mainline information in2_
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:47:36 +1000




::apparently _ _ thinks my postings [& here i'm assuming that his comment 
re: not "get[ting] the point of what you do anymore" is in reference 2 my 
code.wurks & dispersal of info regarding these] r irrelevant in terms of 
artistic vision....& that's his right.........unfortunately i just can't 
believe that _ _ would do this....i've been thinking perhaps he's acting 2 
cut thru woteva he thinks i'm doing & get me talking rather than 
poeticising.......


::absolutely, as is the assumption that ppl on a mailing list:
a) cannot d.cide 4 themselves how to navigate & absorb inform][accumula][tion
b) r an amorphous group of regular dialogical d.votees who r present on 
mailing lists in order 2 b x.posed 2 promotional/descriptive information 
with no depth perception regarding the info/data politik nor the nuanced 
actualities that surround the use of such lists/net.works.......
b) that individuals have the right 2 _own_ & there4 _maintain_ a space on 
the net.work [ie in.boxes] that must subjected 2 info that is 
dis.curs][e][ive in nature & representative of an 
isolation-data-presentation........


::mebbe, i'm not ][largely][ considered radical so i'm not sure........i 
find it soul-destroying & indicative of a shuttering of linked 
communication avenues...a collapsing of creative infra.structural 
possibilities....




From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 6|9:dialogue that x.cludes the multilogue_
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:48:02 +1000




::....the closure of list forums 2 anything but closed-down predicated 
theory/discussion/banal correspondence, reiteration of "acceptable" 
dialogue that x.cludes the multilogue, lauding individualisation rather 
than entity-bouncing via replicated channels of information that offer a 
completely different model 4 data dispersal......

::......do u now add.here 2 lists 4 the fact that they provide n.dividual 
niches 4 perpetuation of culture along a individualist axis? is there now a 
hierarchical structure that u'd advocate regarding postings? is this 
info-threading via the ecosystem that we call the net now regarded as spam 
b.cause of the politically correct nature of these lists that accept 
repeditive monological personal-correspondance as the norm? is this 
perpetuation of real-time regurgitative communication structure wot u yearn 
2 have in yr inbox?

::the communication structure that gels these lists 2gether.

:: is yr individual/monogaze enuff 2 shift thru the idea of perpetual 
information in flux, a curve of data that can be dipped in2 via x.tended & 
repetitious communication?

::i'm add.vocating areas that sings information as valuable, as resources 2 
b treasured & acting as a [source]pool of communally accessible material 
...if 1 n.dividual is x.posed 2 or 3 times 2 the information, then they 
should b responsible enuff 2 take appropriate action...... 2 tell u the 
truth i'm sick 2 the teeth that ppl r n.tent on interpretation of multiple 
x.posures 2 info.mation or code-d.rived variations via perpetuation of data 
that is drawn back into a canonistic idea of absorption & meaning 
x.traction.........

.the under.writing. of. code. is repetitious.
[dis(ex)tended  language modes r now outlawed in favour of an individuals 
x.posure 2 infodatums].




From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 3.0: pollinatory_
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:48:18 +1000



::i was referring 2 the notion that i c u as employing a monogaze, a 
perceptual slant that hi-lites the net.work as a series of interconnected 
set of difference-loadings, of x.clusive infopackets that can][should][not 
be transferred nor cross-posted in order that multiple x.posure 2 
information|data will not occur 4 various individual enities that n.habit 
various sets....rather than n.corporating a more holistic viewpoint of the 
network & acting along an n.clusion axis......

::i c this monogaze as n.dicative of an ego-driven [by ego i mean 
self-cogitation, not ego as in inflated] awareness that perceives the 
break-points of an netsystem via individual opinions based on an awareness 
that may not be replicated via the community population. i also view it as 
perpetuating a theory structure that relies on a linear interpretation of 
information, 1 that cuts of any repetitive nuancing in order that data is 
presented in accordance with a determinist POV.

::i.c.that.we.should.revel.in.this.cross-pollination.activity.




From: "Cur.][O][va.ture" <netwurker@pop.hotkey.net.au>
Subject: _net_][paral][lax 3.1>< :lust yr cells
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:49:02 +1000




::censorship that mask.err.rades & flounders thru barking conventions is 
damaging, n.deed.
[dismembered cords & broken ][af][fil][iation][aments.]

::or, worse, r capable of per.c++.ving it but cover it with mountains of 
denial tape 4 fear of flowering options.......