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

Lichty, Patrick M pl at voyd.com
Sun Jun 13 03:06:30 CEST 2021


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

 

From: NetBehaviour <netbehaviour-bounces at lists.netbehaviour.org> on behalf of Ruth Catlow via NetBehaviour <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
Date: Saturday, June 12, 2021 at 11:12 AM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity <netbehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org>
Cc: Ruth Catlow <ruthcatlow at gmail.com>
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 <netbehaviour at 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 at 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 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 at lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour



-- 

=====================================================

directory http://www.alansondheim.org tel 718-813-3285
email sondheim ut panix.com, sondheim ut gmail.com

=====================================================

_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour at lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour


 

-- 

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 at lists.netbehaviour.org https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20210612/782215f6/attachment.htm>


More information about the NetBehaviour mailing list