Each medium of communication has a different quality and bandwidth about it, and we can use a multitude of media -- nettime doesn't have to be /just/ a mailing list. Some of us might be better able to contribute via IRC or other more real-time media.
John On 2019-06-08 15:06, John Preston wrote: > Just forwarding this up. > > ------------------------- > FROM: Karim Brohi <ka...@trauma.org> > SENT: 8 June 2019 14:35:45 BST > TO: John Preston <wcerf...@riseup.net> > SUBJECT: Re: <nettime> Nettime is in bad shape. Let's see if we can change > it. > > Nettime is in bad shape - as are most (all?) of the email based discussion > groups on the Interwebs now. > I run another mailing list, started in 1995 in a medical specialty area- - > which finds itself in the same state. Back then email was cool. Now, for > most, email tends to be a flood of work stuff and a pseudo todo list. > Drafting an email is now work, and not associated with pleasure or pure > intellectual pursuit. > > But there's no other suitable medium either. Social media platforms are too > brief to develop ideas. Too easy to fire back "your idea is stupid". Blog > posts and newsletters are too one-sided. Developed/owned by a specific > individual/group of individuals, Comments never have the same precedence as > the original post. The post 'belongs' to the originator, not to the > community. > > Maybe usenet/google groups comes close, but nobody uses them - perhaps > because there's no (effective) 'app for that', and there has to be an active > process of logging in. (Email alerts end up in... email). > > In brief - I think it's the medium not the message. The whole Internet needs > a new medium that encourages long-form discourse and thereby deep community. > That was email, but now it isn't email. I don't know what is now. > > Karim > > On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 at 21:34, John Preston <wcerf...@riseup.net> wrote: > Just adding my two cents, as per the call. :) > > I only discovered nettime in the last few months. I'm a computer-child, I've > grown up on the net, and one of the people who now take a more conservative > or critical approach to tech. I came here because I am trying to develop as > an artist, working with the net as a medium and reflecting critically on the > net and its constituent parts. I don't post in to every thread because a lot > of the time I don't have anything worthwhile to add, but I appreciate > reading: most of the contributions on this list are really insightful. > > The fact that people are posting meta threads like this is a good sign to me, > I appreciate a community that can take a critical view of itself. If nettime > does rap up, let me know where you all go, I'd like to talk more. :) > > John > > On 7 June 2019 18:38:46 BST, nettime mod squad <nett...@kein.org> wrote: > > Nettime is in bad shape, don't you think? > > It has still a lot of goodwill, and more generally there's renewed > interest in formats of exchange and collective thinking that > aren't defined by the logic of social media. But the dynamics that > social media companies exploit are hardly limited to a handful of > platforms. For example, nettime has its own 'influencers' -- a 1%, > so to speak -- who generate the vast majority of list traffic. > That's been true for years. The discussions they sustain may > variously seem interesting or annoying, but either way they've > become somewhat formulaic. An attentive reader knows more or less > what to expect based solely the subject and the sender; and even > meta-discussions about whether the list is dominated or by this or > that tendency are largely dominated by the same few people. > > Some might argue the debates that have animated nettime over the > last year -- the trajectories of postwar society, neoliberalism, > the 'digital,' complexity, surveillance and big tech, Brexit, > media and elections, Assange, even the Anthropocene in all its > terrifying inclusiveness -- are the defining issues of the day. > Maybe so. But if the nettime project had settled for a consensus > model of the defining issues of the mid-'90s, it would never have > gotten off the ground, and it certainly wouldn't exist almost 25 > years later. The challenge, we think, is to maintain a space that > attracts ill-defined ideas and uncertain issues -- things and > not-things that don't quite exist yet and yet haven't been buried > under torrents of authority and theory. > > So, what can we do? > > In the past, we've asked people to think about outreach -- say, > inviting new people from new contexts. It seems like that's had > limited success; but at a time when nettime has been limping > along, it's hard to get excited about inviting people to join an > environment so heavily defined by habit. We've also joked that > shutting it down before it fades into complete senescence might be > best. But that joke wasn't really funny, in part because it wasn't > meant to be: it was a way of expressing serious concerns about the > list's increasingly parochial status. > > Now, we have a simple proposal: let's switch roles. > > It goes like this: > > If you've posted more than others to the list in the last 60 or 90 > or 120 or 180 days -- the math matters less than the spirit -- take > a break. Let others define nettime, a space made up of nearly 5000 > subscribers. > > If you haven't posted to the list -- say, because it seemed like > your ideas, concerns, or whatever you want to share wouldn't fit > with nettime's habits -- maybe that will change. > > Think of it as an un-grand experiment: a way to see what else > might happen, who else might speak, what less familiar ideas, > perspectives, or styles might spring up. Maybe the list will fade > into silence, and we'll be left with a paradoxical object, a list > composed *entirely* of lurkers -- not such a bad non-end for > nettime. Or maybe not. There might be many ways to find out. For > now, rather than the 1% debating how narrowly to define good > manners, let's see if a different 'we' can change things. > > -- the mod squad (Ted and Felix) > > # 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: # 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:
