| nettime's_discursive_constipation on Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:11:18 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| <nettime> correspondence with a human being [x>33] |
[digested @ nettime from four messages]
From: human being <[email protected]>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: human being
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: human being
From: nettime <[email protected]>
From: human being <[email protected]>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: nettime <[email protected]>
From: [email protected]
From: human being <[email protected]>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: human being
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: human being
From: nettime <[email protected]>
From: human being <[email protected]>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
From: nettime <[email protected]>
From: [email protected]
From: human being <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: human being <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:48:00 -0600
Subject: re:quest for public moderation
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
To: [email protected]
From: human being <[email protected]>
> From: human being
> Date: Wed Dec 17, 2003 4:41:21 PM US/Central
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: moderator- question
>
> curious if I could get a sense of whether
> nettime will publish something in near
> enough real-time so that I could send it
> out by this channel, in addition to one
> other, or if i should skip it. it would be
> good for nettime, it is believed, though
> that is not up for me to decide of course.
> opportunities to participate that is. please
> let me know. tomorrow is the likely time.
> thanks. brian
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Thu Dec 18, 2003 10:10:12 AM US/Central
To: human being
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: moderator- question
Hi Brian,
there are multiple people moderating nettime, usually approving things
several times a day. If a couple of ours is 'near real time' for you,
then nettime is ok. If you need it quicker, there are no guarantees.
But, generally, as you know, it also depends on how often people download
their mail. Some do it all the time, some only once a day, and others every
couple of days, so it's very hard to speak of 'real time' in email
lists.
_____
<timing delay>
>>>> # <t-l> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
>>>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
>>>> # more info: [email protected] and "info t-l" in the msg body
>>>> # archive: http://t.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
...
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 8:34:28 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> but wait! there's more!
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: [some spammer]
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:04:23 -0300
Subject: RE: Perfect gift for 2004
Loading, Please Wait...
>>
</timing delay>
<submission>
From: human being
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 11:40:26 PM US/Central (~midnight)
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Era of Self-Deception II/II
</submission>
> From: human being
> Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 12:02:57 AM US/Central (~midnight)
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: request
>
> please publish ASAP previous
> article for personal safety related
> to issues of speed/info transit and
> severity of issues involved. thanks.
> (era of self-deception ii/ii)
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 11:10:05 AM US/Central (~noon)
To: human being
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: request
Hey Brian,
what's the problem? I don't get it. _____
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0401/msg00012.html
> From: human being
> Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:29:39 PM US/Central
> To: Nettime <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: request
>
>
> there was a follow-up post, that was
> II/II (era of self-deception ii/ii) I sent
> which has serious repercussions if
> it did not get sent out quickly to a wide
> audience, and never got sent out now.
<resubmit>
From: human being
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:44:40 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: Era of Self-Deception II/II
</resubmit>
> From: human being
> Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 4:41:12 PM US/Central
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: question
>
> _____, will you let me know if you
> are not going to publish the e-mail,
> i will look for another forum in which
> to send it out, then. thanks. _____
<note>
question not addressed by same moderator,
non-decision arrives 17 hours later...
</note>
From: nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:14:03 AM US/Central
To: human being
Subject: Re: question
hi, brian --
i'm not sure whether _____ got back to you, but my own sense -- not
involved in deciding whether to approve this or not -- was that it
just isn't worth it. david brooks is THE most boring editirialist
ever. the NYT had no idea what they were getting into when they
hired krugman ('you say he's an economist at princeton? that sounds
safe enough!'), who promptly spun out of control AND developed a
deeply loyal international readership. so when it came time again
to get a new editorialist, they got a guy who's 100% stepfordized.
imo.
cheers,
_
> From: human being
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:27:13 AM US/Central
> To: nettime <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: question
>
> hi _, thanks for the input. to me this is one
> of those more literal publish or perish moments
> as it has some political repercussions, and with
> no channel to send through then few will know
> of the basics. felt it fell within cultural politics of
> the net, tactical media and the rest, in practice,
> that is. also, am going to be sending to the following
> and will once again cc' nettime-l. to me, if nettime-l
> cannot publish such work, i would find it hard to
> reconcile as sometimes things need to go through
> that someone may not agree with, IMO. free speech.
> if forum is appropriate. 9/11, bush knew, that's the
> point. in any case, here's who is going to get the
> file, also, since nettime is stalling on it...
<unsubscript>
From: human being <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:41:30 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject:
unsubscribe nettime-l
--
>>>> unsubscribe nettime-l
Succeeded.
>>>>
</unsubscript>
<resubmit>
> From: human being
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 10:02:46 AM US/Central
> To: [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
> Subject: Era of Self-Deception II/II
>
> Mr. David Brooks,
>
> There is a need to write once again regarding
> your article in the New York Times, which is in
> today's local newspaper: entitled: The Era of Distortion
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/06/opinion/06BROO.html
</resubmit>
> From: human being <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 12:24:13 PM US/Central
> To: nettime <[email protected]>
> Cc: ( )
> Subject: request for masthead
>
>
> Hi _, _____. I would like to request
> a list of the current editors of nettime-l
> for my private archives. I think there
> were a few others, I will file it away,
> nothing will be done with e-mails, etc.
> just need a record of those at the helm
> during the nettime of this decision.
> thanks in advance. brian
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 5:19:14 PM US/Central
To: human being
Cc: ( )
Subject: Re: request for masthead
Brian,
While i like your writings i start getting annoyed by the surrounding
messages. Can you please stop putting pressure on us?
-> I put ( ) in the cc, did you see?
Thanks,
_____
> From: human being <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 5:25:39 PM US/Central
> To: Nettime <[email protected]>
> Cc: ( )
> Subject: Re: request for masthead
>
> (i do this alot, not intential, but i forgot ( ) was
> not automatically put into the CC and thus resending.
> human error. apologies)
>
> _____, I unsubbed from the list so that will not
> be a problem. All I am asking for is who the
> moderators are during this time. If it is not
> possible to share this information, that is okay,
> it was only a request. As for pressure, I will not
> be putting pressure on you, it is unfortunate
> it is perceived to be this way, when 50% of
> my posts have to be resent to ever be posted.
> Thus, it is out of habit, probably. In any case,
> no need to continue this. Did not mean anything
> by putting ( ) in, as I do not know who the
> moderators actually are who made this decision
> thus thought it would not hurt to send to ( ),
> though I do not expect that to change anything
> or to add any pressure. I will cc' ( ) one more
> time, just for the record, and then it is complete.
> Hopefully everything is taken care of then. Brian
<note>
posts said sometimes lost to 'spam filters'
</note>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 5:54:06 PM US/Central
To: human being
Subject: Re: request for masthead
Brian,
The names of the current moderators are on the info page of the
nettime.org website. I am one out of four.
From my point of view a main problem - it is extremely trivial -
concerning the approval of your messages is the length of your
messages. As a non native english speaking person it takes me extremly
long reading your mails. Beside that, they are so detailed that
somebody like me, who has just a rough idea of US related structures in
all the different fields you refer to, gets sometimes confused in
interpreting them.
Practically this means, that it's mainly a matter of time management
between the mods concerning the time of distributing of your messages.
The others may have another sight of it.
_____
I dont know if you got it, but i posted your message (prior reading your
request of mod names and the info of your unsubscription, which i am
sorry for. imo, you shouldn't - i know thats arrogant to say)
> <comment> and in the 'next 5 minutes', 54 seconds....
>
> Brooks on Friday 6PM TV broadcast for weekly debate
>
> (estimated 41 hours, 13 minutes, 39 seconds elapsed)
>
> David Brooks has 10 minutes airtime on PBS TV
> Newshour, spreading falsities debunked in essay
> with false logic, propaganda strategy cracked open.
> hundreds of thousands to millions of .US TV viewers
> fed lies, distortions, agendas that could be countered.
>
>
> </comment>
From: nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:34:01 PM US/Central
To: human being
Subject: Re: request for masthead
brian, you can do whatever you want, but from my perspective
your mood swings are very, very palpable, and the noise that
surrounds some of your messages seems to correlate with cer-
tain phases of those swings.
we're all very busy with other things, and it's the rare ex-
ception when we consult with each other about a message. this
is occasionally a source of tension, because we've never fig-
ured out a sensible way to communicate on a regular basis, so
sometimes messages sit for days or even weeks in the inbox --
then i approve them and _____ hassles me, or _____ does some-
thing and i hassle him, or whatever. that's the reality of how
nettime works; when you get impatient, your messages assume all
kinds of things (scheduling, reliable consultation) that aren't
what goes on. (for example, contacting _____: he hasn't been in-
volved in running nettime in over five years.)
anyway, i'm sorry you unsubbed, but i don't think it really has
much to do with anything we have or haven't done. i hope that
you sub again soon.
cheers,
_
> # <t-l> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> # more info: [email protected] and "info t-l" in the msg body
> # archive: http://t.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
anyway, i'm sorry you unsubbed, but i don't think it really has
much to do with anything we have or haven't done. i hope that
you sub again soon.
>>>> request for public moderation
From: [email protected]
Date: Sat Jan 10, 2004 12:40:59 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Era of Self-Deception II/II
Thank you for emailing Vice President Cheney. Your ideas and comments
are very important to him.
Unfortunately, because of the large volume of email received, the Vice
President cannot personally respond to each message. However, the White
House staff considers and reports citizen ideas and concerns.
Again, thank you for your email. Your interest in the work of Vice
President Cheney and the administration is appreciated.
Sincerely,
The White House Office of E-Correspondence
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:48:00 -0600
Subject: re:quest for public moderation
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
To: [email protected]
From: human being <[email protected]>
> From: human being
> Date: Wed Dec 17, 2003 4:41:21 PM US/Central
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: moderator- question
>
> curious if I could get a sense of whether
> nettime will publish something in near
> enough real-time so that I could send it
> out by this channel, in addition to one
> other, or if i should skip it. it would be
> good for nettime, it is believed, though
> that is not up for me to decide of course.
> opportunities to participate that is. please
> let me know. tomorrow is the likely time.
> thanks. brian
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Thu Dec 18, 2003 10:10:12 AM US/Central
To: human being
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: moderator- question
Hi Brian,
there are multiple people moderating nettime, usually approving things
several times a day. If a couple of ours is 'near real time' for you,
then nettime is ok. If you need it quicker, there are no guarantees.
But, generally, as you know, it also depends on how often people download
their mail. Some do it all the time, some only once a day, and others every
couple of days, so it's very hard to speak of 'real time' in email
lists.
_____
<timing delay>
>>>> # <t-l> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
>>>> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
>>>> # more info: [email protected] and "info t-l" in the msg body
>>>> # archive: http://t.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
...
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 8:34:28 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> but wait! there's more!
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: [some spammer]
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:04:23 -0300
Subject: RE: Perfect gift for 2004
Loading, Please Wait...
>>
</timing delay>
<submission>
From: human being
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 11:40:26 PM US/Central (~midnight)
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Era of Self-Deception II/II
</submission>
> From: human being
> Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 12:02:57 AM US/Central (~midnight)
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: request
>
> please publish ASAP previous
> article for personal safety related
> to issues of speed/info transit and
> severity of issues involved. thanks.
> (era of self-deception ii/ii)
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 11:10:05 AM US/Central (~noon)
To: human being
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: request
Hey Brian,
what's the problem? I don't get it. _____
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0401/msg00012.html
> From: human being
> Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:29:39 PM US/Central
> To: Nettime <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: request
>
>
> there was a follow-up post, that was
> II/II (era of self-deception ii/ii) I sent
> which has serious repercussions if
> it did not get sent out quickly to a wide
> audience, and never got sent out now.
<resubmit>
From: human being
Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 1:44:40 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: Era of Self-Deception II/II
</resubmit>
> From: human being
> Date: Thu Jan 8, 2004 4:41:12 PM US/Central
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: question
>
> _____, will you let me know if you
> are not going to publish the e-mail,
> i will look for another forum in which
> to send it out, then. thanks. _____
<note>
question not addressed by same moderator,
non-decision arrives 17 hours later...
</note>
From: nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:14:03 AM US/Central
To: human being
Subject: Re: question
hi, brian --
i'm not sure whether _____ got back to you, but my own sense -- not
involved in deciding whether to approve this or not -- was that it
just isn't worth it. david brooks is THE most boring editirialist
ever. the NYT had no idea what they were getting into when they
hired krugman ('you say he's an economist at princeton? that sounds
safe enough!'), who promptly spun out of control AND developed a
deeply loyal international readership. so when it came time again
to get a new editorialist, they got a guy who's 100% stepfordized.
imo.
cheers,
_
> From: human being
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:27:13 AM US/Central
> To: nettime <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: question
>
> hi _, thanks for the input. to me this is one
> of those more literal publish or perish moments
> as it has some political repercussions, and with
> no channel to send through then few will know
> of the basics. felt it fell within cultural politics of
> the net, tactical media and the rest, in practice,
> that is. also, am going to be sending to the following
> and will once again cc' nettime-l. to me, if nettime-l
> cannot publish such work, i would find it hard to
> reconcile as sometimes things need to go through
> that someone may not agree with, IMO. free speech.
> if forum is appropriate. 9/11, bush knew, that's the
> point. in any case, here's who is going to get the
> file, also, since nettime is stalling on it...
<unsubscript>
From: human being <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:41:30 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject:
unsubscribe nettime-l
--
>>>> unsubscribe nettime-l
Succeeded.
>>>>
</unsubscript>
<resubmit>
> From: human being
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 10:02:46 AM US/Central
> To: [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
> [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
> Subject: Era of Self-Deception II/II
>
> Mr. David Brooks,
>
> There is a need to write once again regarding
> your article in the New York Times, which is in
> today's local newspaper: entitled: The Era of Distortion
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/06/opinion/06BROO.html
</resubmit>
> From: human being <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 12:24:13 PM US/Central
> To: nettime <[email protected]>
> Cc: ( )
> Subject: request for masthead
>
>
> Hi _, _____. I would like to request
> a list of the current editors of nettime-l
> for my private archives. I think there
> were a few others, I will file it away,
> nothing will be done with e-mails, etc.
> just need a record of those at the helm
> during the nettime of this decision.
> thanks in advance. brian
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 5:19:14 PM US/Central
To: human being
Cc: ( )
Subject: Re: request for masthead
Brian,
While i like your writings i start getting annoyed by the surrounding
messages. Can you please stop putting pressure on us?
-> I put ( ) in the cc, did you see?
Thanks,
_____
> From: human being <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 5:25:39 PM US/Central
> To: Nettime <[email protected]>
> Cc: ( )
> Subject: Re: request for masthead
>
> (i do this alot, not intential, but i forgot ( ) was
> not automatically put into the CC and thus resending.
> human error. apologies)
>
> _____, I unsubbed from the list so that will not
> be a problem. All I am asking for is who the
> moderators are during this time. If it is not
> possible to share this information, that is okay,
> it was only a request. As for pressure, I will not
> be putting pressure on you, it is unfortunate
> it is perceived to be this way, when 50% of
> my posts have to be resent to ever be posted.
> Thus, it is out of habit, probably. In any case,
> no need to continue this. Did not mean anything
> by putting ( ) in, as I do not know who the
> moderators actually are who made this decision
> thus thought it would not hurt to send to ( ),
> though I do not expect that to change anything
> or to add any pressure. I will cc' ( ) one more
> time, just for the record, and then it is complete.
> Hopefully everything is taken care of then. Brian
<note>
posts said sometimes lost to 'spam filters'
</note>
From: Nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 5:54:06 PM US/Central
To: human being
Subject: Re: request for masthead
Brian,
The names of the current moderators are on the info page of the
nettime.org website. I am one out of four.
From my point of view a main problem - it is extremely trivial -
concerning the approval of your messages is the length of your
messages. As a non native english speaking person it takes me extremly
long reading your mails. Beside that, they are so detailed that
somebody like me, who has just a rough idea of US related structures in
all the different fields you refer to, gets sometimes confused in
interpreting them.
Practically this means, that it's mainly a matter of time management
between the mods concerning the time of distributing of your messages.
The others may have another sight of it.
_____
I dont know if you got it, but i posted your message (prior reading your
request of mod names and the info of your unsubscription, which i am
sorry
for. imo, you shouldn't - i know thats arrogant to say)
> <comment> and in the 'next 5 minutes', 54 seconds....
>
> Brooks on Friday 6PM TV broadcast for weekly debate
>
> (estimated 41 hours, 13 minutes, 39 seconds elapsed)
>
> David Brooks has 10 minutes airtime on PBS TV
> Newshour, spreading falsities debunked in essay
> with false logic, propaganda strategy cracked open.
> hundreds of thousands to millions of .US TV viewers
> fed lies, distortions, agendas that could be countered.
>
>
> </comment>
From: nettime <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jan 9, 2004 9:34:01 PM US/Central
To: human being
Subject: Re: request for masthead
brian, you can do whatever you want, but from my perspective
your mood swings are very, very palpable, and the noise that
surrounds some of your messages seems to correlate with cer-
tain phases of those swings.
we're all very busy with other things, and it's the rare ex-
ception when we consult with each other about a message. this
is occasionally a source of tension, because we've never fig-
ured out a sensible way to communicate on a regular basis, so
sometimes messages sit for days or even weeks in the inbox --
then i approve them and _____ hassles me, or _____ does some-
thing and i hassle him, or whatever. that's the reality of how
nettime works; when you get impatient, your messages assume all
kinds of things (scheduling, reliable consultation) that aren't
what goes on. (for example, contacting _____: he hasn't been in-
volved in running nettime in over five years.)
anyway, i'm sorry you unsubbed, but i don't think it really has
much to do with anything we have or haven't done. i hope that
you sub again soon.
cheers,
_
> # <t-l> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> # more info: [email protected] and "info t-l" in the msg body
> # archive: http://t.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
anyway, i'm sorry you unsubbed, but i don't think it really has
much to do with anything we have or haven't done. i hope that
you sub again soon.
>>>> request for public moderation
From: [email protected]
Date: Sat Jan 10, 2004 12:40:59 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Era of Self-Deception II/II
Thank you for emailing Vice President Cheney. Your ideas and comments
are very
important to him.
Unfortunately, because of the large volume of email received, the Vice
President cannot personally respond to each message. However, the White
House
staff considers and reports citizen ideas and concerns.
Again, thank you for your email. Your interest in the work of Vice
President
Cheney and the administration is appreciated.
Sincerely,
The White House Office of E-Correspondence
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:44:23 -0600
Subject: but wait! there's more! (digest)
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
To: [email protected]
From: human being <[email protected]>
digest of "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]> :
(1) <nettime> Year supply of gas ([email protected])
(2) <nettime> illusory tantrums ([email protected])
(3) <nettime> Free Food [four-digit number] ([email protected])
(4) <nettime> but wait! there's more! ([email protected])
(1)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 1:46:51 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> Year supply of gas
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
[from some spammer]
[1][wfgad1.jpg]
[2]www.___FreeGas.com
Nationwide[3] Official Rules
This Message Is Being Sent To [email protected]. [4]To Be
Immediately Removed
References
1. http://www.___freegas.com/
2. http://www.___FreeGas.com/
3. http://www.___freegas.com/dor/
4. http://www.___freegas.com/wfg/[email protected]
> # 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
(2)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:21:58 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> illusory tantrums
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Subject: Lucky!
Subject: Children's nead your help
Subject: she's older, is that ok?
Subject: Did you miss it? (adults only)
Subject: have the body you want
Subject: Your Car moving company
Subject: Pull a Fast One in your Bathroom - Record your Own Messages
Subject: Serious !!
Subject: Arousal problems?
Subject: Sexta Disco no Armaz�m da Vila
Subject: FINANCIAL Independence Is Calling You...carver
Subject: Your pass mark lays sorely on the feasibility study.
Subject: O melhor do pagode e ax� nesse s�bado a tarde 22/11 !
Subject: The Talking Simpsons Bottle Opener
Subject: Richiesta consenso invio materiale informativo.
Subject: It makes me feel like gold
Subject: Re: hey
Subject: LET US DO THIS FOR HUMANITY
Subject: I HAVE MY MIND SET TO INVEST
Subject: exposes countywide
Subject: Letter from Russia
Subject: Matrix Revolution!
Subject: Hey.. I called you...
Subject: Value MedsJf
Subject: Re: Good Enough For Her?
Subject: Urgent
Subject: Letter from Russia
Subject: Reforma e venda de cadeiras
Subject: Piano and Keyboard Lessons Update
Subject: polymorph event
Subject: bluet scattered
Subject: booze ace
Subject: breakables maximum
Subject: playful megaton
Subject: acrimony scabbard
Subject: actually talkative
Subject: scorned expansion
Subject: tests baudelaire
Subject: search bolivia
Subject: brainwashes tardiness
Subject: andre scouting
Subject: crank ado
Subject: i have a new cream for stretch marks
Subject: schizoid billings
Subject: illusory tantrums
Subject: pointers expositor
Subject: husks ploy
Subject: merganser pompey
Subject: breakfasts executrix
Subject: breadth bowlines
Subject: powerful stuff! i approve!Tipmaakn
Subject: crawler microfilms
> # 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
(3)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:43:00 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> Free Food [four-digit number]
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
[From: some spammer]
< ... html ... >
when Piggy died so did the conch. the sacrifices of Dr. Manette
This act is normally missed by common society. We seem to fold it all
in until
we explode. Likes: I liked the way that the author seems to stay in the
story
the entire way and is adding things as you go along.
> # 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
(4)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 8:34:28 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> but wait! there's more!
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: [some spammer]
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:04:23 -0300
Subject: RE: Perfect gift for 2004
Loading, Please Wait...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:44:23 -0600
Subject: but wait! there's more! (digest)
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
To: [email protected]
From: human being <[email protected]>
digest of "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]> :
(1) <nettime> Year supply of gas ([email protected])
(2) <nettime> illusory tantrums ([email protected])
(3) <nettime> Free Food [four-digit number] ([email protected])
(4) <nettime> but wait! there's more! ([email protected])
(1)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Sep 5, 2003 1:46:51 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> Year supply of gas
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
[from some spammer]
[1][wfgad1.jpg]
[2]www.___FreeGas.com
Nationwide[3] Official Rules
This Message Is Being Sent To [email protected]. [4]To Be
Immediately Removed
References
1. http://www.___freegas.com/
2. http://www.___FreeGas.com/
3. http://www.___freegas.com/dor/
4. http://www.___freegas.com/wfg/[email protected]
> # 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
(2)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:21:58 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> illusory tantrums
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Subject: Lucky!
Subject: Children's nead your help
Subject: she's older, is that ok?
Subject: Did you miss it? (adults only)
Subject: have the body you want
Subject: Your Car moving company
Subject: Pull a Fast One in your Bathroom - Record your Own Messages
Subject: Serious !!
Subject: Arousal problems?
Subject: Sexta Disco no Armaz�m da Vila
Subject: FINANCIAL Independence Is Calling You...carver
Subject: Your pass mark lays sorely on the feasibility study.
Subject: O melhor do pagode e ax� nesse s�bado a tarde 22/11 !
Subject: The Talking Simpsons Bottle Opener
Subject: Richiesta consenso invio materiale informativo.
Subject: It makes me feel like gold
Subject: Re: hey
Subject: LET US DO THIS FOR HUMANITY
Subject: I HAVE MY MIND SET TO INVEST
Subject: exposes countywide
Subject: Letter from Russia
Subject: Matrix Revolution!
Subject: Hey.. I called you...
Subject: Value MedsJf
Subject: Re: Good Enough For Her?
Subject: Urgent
Subject: Letter from Russia
Subject: Reforma e venda de cadeiras
Subject: Piano and Keyboard Lessons Update
Subject: polymorph event
Subject: bluet scattered
Subject: booze ace
Subject: breakables maximum
Subject: playful megaton
Subject: acrimony scabbard
Subject: actually talkative
Subject: scorned expansion
Subject: tests baudelaire
Subject: search bolivia
Subject: brainwashes tardiness
Subject: andre scouting
Subject: crank ado
Subject: i have a new cream for stretch marks
Subject: schizoid billings
Subject: illusory tantrums
Subject: pointers expositor
Subject: husks ploy
Subject: merganser pompey
Subject: breakfasts executrix
Subject: breadth bowlines
Subject: powerful stuff! i approve!Tipmaakn
Subject: crawler microfilms
> # 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
(3)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:43:00 PM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> Free Food [four-digit number]
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
[From: some spammer]
< ... html ... >
when Piggy died so did the conch. the sacrifices of Dr. Manette
This act is normally missed by common society. We seem to fold it all
in until
we explode. Likes: I liked the way that the author seems to stay in the
story
the entire way and is adding things as you go along.
> # 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
(4)==============================
From: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
Date: Wed Jan 7, 2004 8:34:28 AM US/Central
To: [email protected]
Subject: <nettime> but wait! there's more!
Reply-To: "nettime's_spam_kr!k!t" <[email protected]>
From: [some spammer]
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 00:04:23 -0300
Subject: RE: Perfect gift for 2004
Loading, Please Wait...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
# 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: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]