<nettime> Re: spooky silence

[snafu@kyuzz.org]

t byfield wrote:

> snafu@kyuzz.org (Mon 12/20/99 at 09:23 PM +0100):
>
>  <...>
> >  afaic, TT had no choice whatsoever--
> > >/~rdom was inaccessible *anyway*,as were many other sites,
> >
> > i don't understand what "anyway" means, in these circumstances...
>
> it means that the EDT webpage wasn't accessible before
> it was deleted because Verio had blocked access to www.
> thing.net.
>
> > >and TT's business was seriously at risk. moreover, NSI's de-
> > >cision to put the etoy.com *domain* on hold (which was *not*
> > >stipulated in the california court's preliminary injunction)
> > >suggests that Etoys may have applied pressure on NSI;
> >
> > also this passage is quite dark... which pressures?
>
> i don't know; i've certainly encouraged people who're
> in a strong position to try to find out what kind of
> pressures might have made NSI shut down the etoy.com
> domain.
>

i'm glad that you have these powerful channels of communication...maybe here
resides all the difference between me and you... you
have the sensation to move on a higher level, i've just the floodnet
and few other tools to understand how the power acts...


> >  had it
> > >done so with regard to TT, the result could have been that
> > >*all* TT hosts--the entire domain--might have been blocked.
> >
> > why? because if NSI's feels some prickling automatically shuts you down? do
> > you mean that we are little mouses oon the egde of being squashed by the
> > big giant?
>
> yes.
>
> >            if it's really like that, why don't we address this issue of the
> > uncontrolled power of NSI's?
>
> NSI's power is very much under control, i assure you. ICANN
> has them (and every other 'competitive' registrar) on a very
> short leash indeed.
>
> >                              Where is Paul Garrin?
>
> here: <http://www.icann.org/registrars/accredited-list.html>.
>
> > >> actions of  protest are being organised all
> > >> around the world. but this list continue
> > >> to speaks about barbie dolls and other very
> > >> "high profile issues".
> > >
> > >in other words, the entire list hasn't capitulated to panic
> > >politics. that's good.
> >
> > panic politics? Seattle was panic politics?
> >
> >  there are people on this list who've
> > >been working very diligently to deal with these issues else-
> > >where;
> >
> > i'm glad to know that net.time has an hidden agenda. until now i thought
> > that on net.time was possible to deal with any kind of issue. now i know
> > that there are some issues, such as hacktivism, that is better to discuss
> > "elsewhere"
>
> i think your remarks here are completely contrary and nothing
> more. if you want the list to discuss something, the best way
> to make it happen is to do what you did: bring it up.

i was just very surprised to see that people that are much closer
to the " kernel" of the events , didn't feel the necessity to inform the list
of what was happening. the informations that i get are third hand infoz,
so it looked very weird for me to be the first one to bring the
issue up...


> and for
> the rest of what you say, is everyone on the list supposed to
> tell you about all their daily activities? if they don't then
> that's a 'hidden agenda'? bleh.
>

i don't mind about your daily activities, i just thought that the silence
was the sign of a precise choice not to talk about the argument, instead of
a simple forgetting... and i'm still full of doubts...


> >  the fact that you haven't seen much talk on the list
> > >doesn't mean that no one cares or no one is doing anything.
> >
> > but Jesus Christ! net.time is hosted by the thing! it's the first place
> > where we should get informations on the topic...
>
> no: if you feel that strongly, it's the first place you should
> GIVE information on the topic. first you complain that nettime
> has a hidden agenda then you complain that you can't just open
> it up like the daily newspaper and have the facts at your fin-
> gertips...
>
>  <snip>
>

i don't read newspapers, i don't watch tv... if i expect something on
net.time is only because net.time is supposed to be a place where
people do care about a friendly server that is shut down... i didn't found
net.time nor the thing, there's a vast range of people that are surely
involved much more than me, but they prefer not to speak...


> > >> if anyone has something to hide, it would be
> > >> better that s/h/it speaks immediately, since what
> > >> happened on friday is one of the most illegal
> > >> and arrogant acts that occurred since the born
> > >> of the internet. an act that definitely shows
> > >> the real face of this "democratic" media, and
> > >> of the powerful who rule it.
> > >
> > >i think it was just Machtpolitik of a very boring and predic-
> > >table kind. but the issue is far from resolved: as the saying
> > >goes, 'it ain't over till the fat lady sings.'
> >
> > especially because /~rdom is still down. i find this completely
> > unaccetable. i wish you are aware that the thing's business -- as you call
> > it -- has survived only cutting off is political side. something that in
> > italy, for istance, would never happen. here we continue to support
> > political prisoners, even if we don't agree with their methods (we simply
> > believe that prison is not a solution). TT had to survive, but i don't see
> > any reason for which /~rdom should die. remember that VERIO's decision came
> > without any judge injunction... it's illegal, since alleged VERIO's
> > policies has not been discussed by anyone.
>
> it's very easy to jump up and issue all kinds of bombastic
> pronunciamentos. sorry, but the only way that closing down
> ricardo's website = TT 'cutting off its political side' is
> if ricardo = TT's 'political side.' i don't think that's
> so, but you may think it is: fine, we don't need to agree.

i don't think that there are many others areas, beside the area
infowar (launched by ricardo, now closed) and /~rdom on which
you can discuss or read about net.politics on TT... net.time is hosted
by, but it's not TT, the areas such as projects, video and audio are dedicated
mainly to aesthetical forms of expression (with the exception of few political
interviews, always made by EDT), so where is the political side of TT,
besides ricardo's activities?

> it's very unfortunate that the existing power structure of
> the net is such that TT can be given an ultimatum such as
> '~/rdom or connectivity, take your pick,' but that's how it
> works. the timing is a surprise, but the structure isn't.
> to say that isn't to defend the situation as fair or just;
> i don't think it is--but it is the present reality.
>

so we sit on the chair and we wait for CNN reports?

> > >> we can not agree with the EDT tactics, but
> > >> what happened on friday is on another level,
> > >> is really on another level. if you don't
> > >> understand this, we have already lost.
> > >
> > >very much agreed. ever since EDT began its activities, critics
> > >--myself included--have warned that exactly this kind of thing
> > >would happen. not surpisingly, when the larger power structure
> > >in which EDT has been functioning bares its teeth, the mystify-
> > >ing metaphors like 'sit-in' completely fall apart.
> >
> > yes, but these actions have the quality to unmask the real face
> > of power. to unmask the fairy tale of the decentered, democratic,
> > partecipative media. as for censorship in general,  they show the
> > boundaries in which you can move. they give us the opportunity to touch an
> > open nerve, to measure our possibilities and the ones of the enemy.
> > conflict in general give the opportunity to grow. only conflicts indicate
> > an exit way.
>
> yes. the etoy/etoys fight is incredibly important--of course
> because it has been *made* important. it's not so clear what
> will happen with these other fights yet.
>

it has been made important on the base of a common
(i hope) political decision to not give up...
everyone can choose a different way of fight, but i think that is
very important to support also the ones that choose a different
method from ours. it wasn't written anywhere that a flood attack
would have necessarly produced such a repressive answer. this is the first time
that it happens. and it's good to know it. it's good to know that
VERIO doesn't move a finger if you flood the Mexican Government
and shuts you down immediately if you just touch etoys. it suggests a
configuration
of power.

> > and indeed there are several forms of conflict: the digital strike is very
> > close to a performative act (electronic disturbance THEATER, never forget
> > that) a simulation of a conflict (it doesn't produce any real trouble, at
> > maximum a bit of white noise) since it's mainly aimed to attract attention
> > on some issues, to set a common grid of time (Seattle---->>London for
> > istance)... and to produce various reactions.
> >
> > unluckily, there's always people that take fake guns for real
> > (as it happened with Black Panthers)...
>
> i think the alleged 'theater' aspect of EDT is a convenient
> one-foot-in-the-door-and-one-foot-out rhetoric that's quite
> typical in art practice these days. it strikes me as *very*
> manipulative, because the 'non-theater' part invokes a moral
> legacy with which one cannot argue while the 'theater' part
> makes it easy to say 'well, you disn't *really* expect this
> to actually *change* anything, did you?' which is fine for
> people, if that's what they want to do. but i don't believe
> the language EDT uses to describe itself any more than i'll
> believe the language Etoys uses to describe itself. again,
> others may disagree.
>

for me there's no contradiction. it's a performance (like etoy's ones)that is
founded on a moral legacy -- difficult here to take comparisons
with etoy, which is quite a-moral, but easier to think about Rtmark, for
istance..
So, what's the matter with it?
The Leaving Theater was manipulative?
We play, because it is  the only way to communicate without pretending to
convince
the other. Nobody imposes you to partecipate to a virtual sit-in and if you
decide to
enter, you find a statement that advise on the personal risks that occur.
it's very trasparent and i don't see any manipulation in act...

> >  and, as has
> > >become a tiresome pattern on nettime and other such lists, vir-
> > >tual activists use the list to promote their earth-shattering
> > >activities but never provide any follow-up reports.
> >
> > it's not true. i've read a couple of reports by EDT.
>
> 'YMMV.'
>
> >  so, if you
> > >want to criticize the list for failing to discuss what happen-
> > >ed, please keep that longer silence in mind--it's an important
> > >part of the context.
> >
> > i'll never forget it. it took off ingenuity from my eyes.
>
> more important, you broke the silence.
>

hope so, i don't see many reactions...

> cheers,
> t

  ciao!

snafu

#  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: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net