i want to address some of these things specifically:
1. my wish was not to make this public,
it was a private request. it is only now public
because Bennet or whoever desired it so. as i
told no one except my "co conspirators". so
if anyone is irritated by this public issue you should
know who to blame.
2. you are asking me to consider Bennetts feelings etc.
simply, i did so to the best of my ability...i wanted Bennett
spared of any public ridicule that some felt would be neccessary
to get him to quit posting so much poetry. HENCE the private
request. subsequently FAPA was attacked as being "sneaky"
"undemocratic" and against "freedom". and now is being attacked
for not respecting his feelings. when that was the sole intent
of the private request. so both criticisms are erroneous.
3. the only source of the lack of respect Bennett is getting is
from his desire (or someone he told) to make the issue public.
4. as far as "present" "discuss" and "theorize about our work" i was
simply presenting discussing and theorize about my "work"
and Bennetts work. we don't object to Bennett "presenting"
his work in the form of links, as we felt he has somewhat abused
his "presenting " privelages, rights or whatever.
5. as far as "the Tournament of Blockades" goes only 2 submitions
have been generated (both by myself) one: an anonymous blockade
and two: a blockade of Bennetts poetry bombardment. so there is
nothing to report. i also Blockaded some right-libertarians on an
anarchy news group but i felt that blockade not worth submiting.
6. barring any further attacks against FAPA this will be
the last that i personally will say on the issue UNLESS
Bennett continues to post his poetry not in the form of
a link (posting his actual poetry instead of providing
a link to his poetry posted on an outside source)
if he does then i will continue my personal blockading
activities. so it's up to him if he wishes to coninue
this "lack of consideration" for his feelings. as it was up
to him from the very start. he had all the time in the world
to consider that he may be posting too much poetry.
Jason Pierce
rep. Fluxlisters Against Poetic Aggression
At 4:47 AM -0700 5/25/01, FLUXLIST-digest wrote:
>Jason,
>
>This is addressed to you since you claim representation of FAPA.
>
>Since 14th September 2000 you have sent 14 posts to Fluxlist. 8 of these
>have been to complain about John M. Bennett sending poetry to the list. That
>means over 50% of your input to this list in the last 9 months has been
>complaint-based.
>
>Whilst I respect your right to say that you do not wish to see John's poems
>on Fluxlist I do not think the way you are going about this respects John's
>feelings in any way.
>
>
>
>In reality, in the history of this list, complaints and the sort of action
>you are now undertaking have led to more people leaving the list (or ceasing
>to post frequently) than anything else. Whilst some people may think that
>John posts too many of his poems I'm in no doubt that everyone would rather
>see the result of individual creativity in their inbox as oppose to the
>material you're currently posting which not only causes bad feeling towards
>John but on your own admission is designed purely to spoof John's form of
>creative expression and done in a manner (FAPA) that can only be hurtful and
>make John feel uncomfortable here. John joined Fluxlist because he saw a
>copy of the Fluxlist poetry book "Happy New Ears" that we did a while back.
>John's poetry has stimulated interesting discussion on the list in the past
>and no doubt will do so again. Those who don't like it can indeed delete it
>and for those receiving the digest version I don't believe that John's short
>texts can be that much of a burden even if his poetry does not appeal to
>you.
>
>Jason, I would urge you to stop this and consider the feelings of others a
>little more. When you subscribed to Fluxlist you will have received a long
>message about the list which included the following:
>
>"Along with the obvious invitation to historians and theorists of the past,
>we encourage active artists to present, discuss, and theorize their work."
>
>John's posts fit into the above framework.
>
>Also from the introductory notes about the list is this:
>
>"Several kinds of behavior will result in expulsion from Fluxlist. Abuse,
>harassment, impersonation, violation of confidentiality, reposting of
>private posts without permission and spamming are unacceptable. "
>
>I think your spoof poems are bordering on harassment now and ask that you
>stop this campaign and post more positive material instead if you wish to
>contribute to the list. You've made your point, now is the time to let it
>lie before things get unpleasant.
>
>On a more positive note you never told us what happened with your 7th Annual
>Tournament of Blockades. Some info on how that turned out would be great.
>
>cheers,
>
>Sol.
